Skip to main content

tv   The Ingraham Angle  FOX News  December 11, 2018 7:00pm-8:00pm PST

7:00 pm
ask yourself. are you happy that somebody is willing to fight to keep their promises? i personally find it refreshing. if you don't like the combative style but it gets us tax cuts, the end of bureaucracy, conservative justices and you'll get as a border wall. that's all the time we have left but let not your heart be troubled. the news is not over because laura ingraham is up next. hello, laura. >> laura: i am excited about your interview with melania. i love her. she's so great. she is still under covered by the media who just anything connected to trump, they will try to trash. >> sean: they are mean and abusive to her. i have gotten to know her. smart, lovely, amazing. on the hope america gets to see that tomorrow. it's so unfair what they've done to her. >> laura: i hope she does more of these types of events. i think, it's not a criticism but it's a suggestion that the
7:01 pm
more people get to know her, the more they are going to like her. so don't make yourself so scared because we want to hear from yo you. >> sean: she is such a success on her own. the best part, and the president was at 49% in his approval rating today. all basically the hysteria on the left is not working. her approval ratings are higher. i have reminded the president. >> laura: yeah, he loves that. i'm so glad you're doing that. give her my best. she's one of my favorites. i am laura ingraham. this is "the ingraham angle" from washington tonight. an oval office where democrats plead for privacy and reveal their losing hand on immigration. plus the disgusting origin story of the radical women's march. we're going to have a new expose that may imperil some of the democrats newest stars. this story is completely wacko. but it snoozes promoting an
7:02 pm
overseas vacation retreat that bans white people. the debate over what can only be described as a new form of voluntary segregation. first, guardians of the fallacy. that's the focus of tonight's angle. the political media establishment, they've been at war, a cold war with donald trump for more than three years now. from the outset, he represented everything they hate, not just as america first policies but hs style that threatened to crash their exclusive club. as the mueller probe and its new new york offshoot come to a head, the media feel well-positioned to recast their image from #fakenews to galaxy saving superheroes like batman or aquaman. they decided to try a franchise reboot. the first comes courtesy of
7:03 pm
"time" magazine's person of the year. >> as we looked at the choices, it became clear that the manipulation and abuse of truth is really the common thread in so many of this year's major stories, from russia to riyadh to silicon valley. we chose to highlight four individuals and one group who have taken great risks in pursuit of greater truths. >> laura: i only caught the last part of what he said when i first saw this. i thought wow, they are giving it to china's persecuted christians. that's amazing. instead, "time" magazine has kept the award kind of inside the family. named a group of journalists as the people of the year with the understated title the guardians and the war on truth. the group includes slain journalist jamal khashoggi and the capital gazette staff which lost members when a shooter open fire on their offices. of course, we love objective
7:04 pm
journalists and the targeting roof reporters because they are doing their jobs is despicable. isn't there something transparently self-serving about journalists giving awards to other journalists? to his credit and professionalism, the capital gazette editor expressed uneasiness about the recognition. he said i hate being the story. he added that this was the first sitdown interview he had done since that june attack. good for him. by the way, as an aside later in the show, we will review whom we would have picked for persons of the year. so stay with us for that. it's going to be a lot of fun. by the way, time isn't the only aging out for trying to resurrect its damage reputation. retired senators are also lumbering back from obscurity to claim the mantle of moral and intellectual superiority. rising from the political dead, they promised their wisdom will save us from trump. you've got to read between the
7:05 pm
lines. chuck hagel and they said we are on the eve of the conclusion of the special counsel investigation. we urge current and future senators to be steadfast and zealous guardians of our democracy by ensuring that partisanship for self interests not replace national interests. well, kind of high-minded malarkey signifying nothing. i will forever salute chuck hagel's military service but that doesn't give him immunity from political criticism that just kind of is brain dead. where was the bipartisan cabal and we need to guardians of the rule of law in transparency during the obama years? fast and furious, benghazi, the irs scandal, mcclendon email cover-up, the horror that the
7:06 pm
va, the green energy boondoggle. where were these 44 senators when we needed guardians of our border? where were they when we needed guardians against the trade deals that empowered her ruthless communist regime in china? and where were they when we needed guardians against activist judges who strayed far beyond their article three powers? look, donald trump ain't perfect. none of us are. none of us is, to be grammatically correct. but he's done more in two years to try to safeguard america than all those senators who signed that op-ed. the media and failed politicos are guardians. they are guardians of a fallacy that the american people need protection from their own political choices. the president was duly elected and is entering the third year of his first term, but the media and political establishment are still in denial. do you notice that they basically have given up on
7:07 pm
substantive debate in any of the issues that trump is really tackling? instead they often prefer personal invective to pragmatic solutions. >> the president has very little in the way of attention span. the president is undisciplined. >> secretary tillerson called him a fing moron. >> he gets bored after about 15 seconds. even people talking to him. >> he doesn't want information. he comes into the child with very little knowledge. >> laura: if he is that uninformed, how did he beat all you smart people? that's my question. populist movements are popping up all over the world. they are challenging the old political orders that have failed to raise the standard of living of their own people or to safeguard the culture. folks aren't mad because they enjoy being mad. they are mad because politicians have screwed things up so badly
7:08 pm
across the board. but the guardians of the old order, they right now feel empowered by trump's legal woes and a new democrat majority in the house. >> we have come here as the first branch of government. article one, the legislative branch. we are coming in good faith to negotiate with you about how we can keep the government open. >> we are going to keep it open up we have border security. if we don't have border security, we are not going to keep it open. >> you are bragging about what has been done. >> bios. >> we want to do the same thing we did last year that we did this year. that's our proposal. if it's good then, it's good now it won't shut down the government. let's debate in private, okay? >> laura: then they media guardians jumped in with their questions.
7:09 pm
>> reporter: what it means to have border security. >> we need border security. the wall is part of under security. >> we came here in good faith we are entering into this kind of discussion in public view. >> it's not bad, nancy. it's called transparency. >> we shutdown the government over a dispute any want to shut it down. you keep talking about it. >> the last time meet, you shut it down. if we don't get it what we want, whether it's for you or the military or anything, i will shut down the government. i tell you what i am proud to shut down the government for border security, chuck. >> laura: well, it's pretty amazing watching this whole thing play out because by refusing to be cowed by warnings that a partial government shutdown would damage him and his party politically, the president is actually doing what they retired senators claim to want. he is standing on principle by acting on the urgent need to
7:10 pm
preserve the sovereignty and security of our country. by the way, notice what pelosi said several times during that very fiery exchange. >> the point is is that there are equities to be weighed and we are here to have a conversation in a prayerful way, so i don't think we should have a debate in front of the press on this. >> we will do it immediately. we will get it passed easily in the house. >> let us have our conversation and we can meet with the press again. >> laura: wait a second, wait a second bird i thought the liberals were all about transparency and protecting the guardians of the truth. but the moment the guardians report on their conversations, nancy wants them shooed out of the room. this exchange shows why trump has confounded the establishment. he pulls the veil back, allowing the american people to see how reasonable and petty the democrats have become.
7:11 pm
an agreement on wall funding may give trump i guess a partial victory. they refused to budge, even if the daca kids and of getting a path to citizenship in the process which they would've gotten last february. no matter how much a deal would help the country. the democrats don't care. score settling and preventing trump from declaring victory. that's the angle. johnny may now with the reaction is rahim because i'm, lincoln fell at the claremont institute and author of "time's failing person of the year list." and a former aide to president clinton is here along with jeffrey lord. for him, let's start with you, your thoughts on the failure of the media and democrats who can't seem to grasp the current moment. what happened today? >> they love slapping themselves on the back. the "time" magazine cover is
7:12 pm
just more of them slapping themselves on the back and saying we are the people we should -- you should aspire to and listen to. it was the hillary clinton emails that came out they said the public aren't supposed to read it but we will filter it for you and you listen to what we say. the same thing you saw happening today as well. imagine the oval office if the roles have been reversed and those were republican sitting there and it was a democrat president, with the press of god in such a great extent as they did today to go what an absolute mania happened today in the oval office. it's unbelievable. it's extraordinary. they wouldn't of done it and they never did it under obama. obama used to kick people out of press conferences too. it only gets reported that its president trump. the two things couldn't have timed themselves better together today. the "time" magazine cover and what we saw unfold in the oval office. >> laura: here are some of the runners up. we had mueller. you can make a decent case for mueller being person of the yea
7:13 pm
year. you had angela merkel. you had putin, you had christine blasey ford. and then you had -- it says david trump on my sheet but i assume it says donald trump. journalist giving awards to other journalists, there's lots of heroism out there. we have some ideas coming up later on in the show. it's a little self-serving, don't you think? it's part of the bubble of the media and politics which i am probably part of. i try not to be, but i'm here so i'm probably part of the problem. but i like you. so that's okay. we like each other. >> i am going to shock raheem say don't often agree with things in "the daily caller" but i do think bob mueller would've been an excellent choice.
7:14 pm
we have a memo that names the president as an unindicted coconspirator. when is the last time that happened? 33 indictments around the world. we have senior white house staff that have been convicted -- >> laura: they don't say unindicted coconspirator. wait a second. are we supposed to the guardians of the truth here? they don't say that. name one place that says that. >> individual 1 was working with cohen. >> laura: don't throw that word coconspirator around. you're getting a little ahead of yourself. >> i think bob mueller would've been a fantastic choice because he really has changed the world. >> laura: journalists are self-serving, all right, jeffrey. >> i think that was a good choice. i back bob mueller. >> laura: to be doing got to ge. >> it says for better or worse, impacted the world. mueller did do that. >> laura: when they gave it to trump, jeffrey, we don't want to spend a lot of time on this, when they gave it to trump, it has to be this snarky comment. back in 2016.
7:15 pm
they hated to give it to him. reminding of america that demagoguery feeds on despair and truth is only powerful as the truth to those who speak it. then the picture of obama. aspirational. in the picture of trump is a menacing figure in a wingback chair. trump -- it's just right down to the fold of is selected, so obvious. >> my favorite is that in 2008 when president obama was elected and selected as person of the year, i'm not kidding you. they compared him to obi-wan kenobi. seriously. and then we get to donald trump, and he's the president of the divided states of america and he's a demagogue and all of this. this is what they do. this is why "time" magazine has been sold three times, gotten rid of by its parent company, bought by somebody else within sold it again a few months after they got it. >> laura: diminishing readership. >> the audience is going down.
7:16 pm
>> laura: the magazines love doing lists because lists always sell. click, click, click, top ten. we have to move to pelosi because pelosi reacted after the oval office, what you couldn't take your eyes off it. it was wild. she comes out and makes the comment about why she was concerned about the transparency of it all here let's watch. >> i would say this, you want to know if it was more productive behind the scenes. some of the reporters saying, fox reporters saying why do you not want transparency in this discussion? we don't want to contradict the president when he was putting forth figures that had no reality to them, no basis in fact. >> laura: no basis in fact? donald trump has wanted a wall for more than three years. he's arguing and fighting for the wall, i guess she is referring and he said certain sectors have less immigration. i'm not sure where that was
7:17 pm
accurate. i've never gotten a read on that. i'm not sure if it was accurate or not. she's not shy about criticizing him ever in public. >> for somebody who makes her living by criticizing this president, you would think she would want every camera in the room. if she is so certain he is saying fossils, then put all the cameras in the world of the room and get everyone to report on it. it seems utterly bizarre, take it back from partisan politics but from a campaigning standpoint which is what she's doing here, you would want that if you believe you were in the right. you only want that if you -- don't want that if you don't believe you're in the right. i think she gets fat. >> laura: horned democrats always against -- a lot of republicans were against the back room deals. smoke-filled rooms where the decisions are made and people come out and say this is how you dumb little people are going to live because we already made the decision. backslapping. were going to tell you how to live. these cameras come in and we see
7:18 pm
what they say when they're nervous. you see the body language of humor. i loved it from beginning to end. >> i don't know if it's a british accent or the ascot, agreeing with you. we are not making frequent television. i will tell you this. no disrespect to nancy pelosi or chuck schumer but did you notice he was missing? did you notice who was missing, the people actually running the congress. mitch mcconnell and paul ryan who are actually running the congress right now. they are running the lame duck congress. these people have nothing to do with the final deal. >> let's have all the leaders there. >> laura: admit it. wasn't it brilliant for trump to call them in? they came into a sandbox. >> the shutdown is still going to be on -- >> laura: hold on. we are going to get to the shutdown. the politics and mechanics of a shutdown in the next block. jeffrey, i think this was classic trump, taking control of the narrative and it wasn't all clean and perfect.
7:19 pm
believe me. i think a couple things, i might've said them differently. but he was engaged. we are doing this. >> yes, yes, that's exactly right. if you notice, you couldn't help but notice nancy pelosi's little dig. she says a reporter asked. then she says it fox reporter. oh, my goodness. heaven forbid. someone commit journalism in the oval office. it's astounding. >> laura: again, getting back to the theme of the angle, the guardians of the truth. when these 44 senators come out, bipartisan, they come out of the big office. i want to play a snippet from what he said today with andrea mitchell. let's watch. >> we have just seen a perfect example of how not to govern the country. to have the kind of dispute and do it openly before the press at a time when they really do need to sit down and see if there's a way to work out a deal here.
7:20 pm
but to confront each other that way and to have everybody yelling at one another, i think it's just sent a terrible message the american people about how our democracy functions in washington. >> laura: does he know his history? they weren't dueling. democracy is rough-and-tumble. people are arguing at the dinner tables. it's okay. we are going to survive in oval office. >> don't you think the difference between -- if that debate. >> laura: personal invective. >> if he shuts down the government, is that a good result? >> laura: absolutely. >> the majority of americans to the polling seem to disagree. we will find out again. actually you just lost the house anything it's states fine. i agree. that's what conservatives think. >> laura: 2013 shutdown didn't hurt the republicans.
7:21 pm
>> there's a goal in mind for that man was elected on that goal and is going to do it. >> laura: he's got to get that wall built them it's got to be a wall. it can't be a patchwork of see-through drones. jeffrey, sorry, we've got to go. we'll have a longer segment. sorry about that. since "time" magazine couldn't pick a satisfying person of the year, were going to do it later on in the hour. up next, beyond the borders. stay there.
7:22 pm
7:23 pm
7:24 pm
7:25 pm
>> laura: this is a fox news alert fox news alert. another terror attack on the christmas market in europe. this time near the city of strasberg friends and officials they're confirming that three people were killed and another e terrorists. gun fire into the holiday crowd and then took off. french authorities confirming the suspect previously known to authorities i have this hour, he is still outstanding. we will update you on any developments as they come to us, very disturbing news out of france tonight. >> a shutdown is not worth anything. we should not have a trumpet shutdown. >> did you say trump? >> you have the white house. you have the senate. you have a house of representatives. you have the vote. you should pass it. >> i can't get a pass to the
7:26 pm
house of it's not going to get past in the senate. >> the fact is you can get started that way. >> the house and get passed very easily and we do but the problem is the senate because we need ten democrats to vote and they won't vote. >> laura: pelosi challenge the president and republicans in the house. they might call her bluff. house republicans said late today they will try to pass a $5 billion funding bill for the wall. this would be a stunning rebuke of nancy pelosi. my question is would a shutdown put pressure on schumer to cough up the democratic votes needed to avoid a filibuster? for answers we are joined by house majority whip steve scalise and former acting head of i.c.e. and fox news contributor tom homan. congressman, was this part of a coordinated plan? was it planned out or was that the president shooting from the hip on his own instincts? >> this is the president saying i'm going to call you on your bluff. you want to talk about shutting down the government. you want to talk about blocking border security. i'm going to bring you to the white house and lay out exactly why we need to secure the border
7:27 pm
and frankly president trump laid out a lot of real important specific details of why it's important that we secure the border. the illegal crossings that happen every single day. ten known terrorists according to homeland security on average they come across our border. every day. and the caravan, over 600 convicted criminals that are part of the caravan. we need to secure the border. president trump ran on securing the border. it's time to back him up on that. >> laura: tom, you've been in the fight and in the thick of it for so long. i frankly, i send this on radio this morning, i cannot believe we are here. this is a crisis at our southern border. toxic environment on mass, health crisis, humanitarian. little kids' lives are being endangered down there. human trafficking, drugs, guns, all the rest, gang activity. not turbo that's just getting started. >> i don't care if republican or democrat, there is no downside on securing our border. it means less illegal
7:28 pm
immigration that means you don't bankroll an organization that kills her officers. i don't see the downside. i wish trump would have asked schumer on camera you voted for the 2006 barrier. what changed? >> laura: kellyanne conway made that point earlier. obama, all these guys spoke passionately about the need to have this fence but now trump says it's a wall and no, no, we only have to give a pittance of the money. jackie speier spoke out today. >> set up that opportunity to test out his theory that he has the boats. i don't think he has the votes in the house. he's acting like he's a cornered animal and he lashes out. that's not the description of any president i want in charge of our country. >> laura: okay. back to the point i made in the last segment. rather than offer a substantive menu of solutions here, it's
7:29 pm
personal invective. it's trump is this. trump is that. it's what she said. there is no solution. they're not going to argue about how we are going to do a better or we have a plan for reforming asylum laws. it is trump is a bad person. is she right? do you have the votes? >> there is strong support in the house. >> laura: do you have the votes? what does that mean? do you have the votes for the wall? >> if the president has $5 billion is what i need and ideally you try to get an agreement with the senate and that means you have to have some democrats as part of that agreement, but if not, we can pass in the house. we've been trying to get an agreement with the senate because ultimately to get the bill to the president's desk has been the objective, not just to pass a bill in the house but ultimately we can pass a bill in the house. the president is saying i will at least meet with senate democrats and house democrats to see if we can get an agreement. the president is trying to get an agreement to solve the problem. i think what you are saying now
7:30 pm
and on today it was on display in the white house, a washington democrats want open borders more than they want -- >> laura: they don't want to give him a win. isn't that a big part of this? he could have solved this last january and february during the other many shutdown when the president said give me chain migration cuts, the visa lottery. >> chuck schumer initially agreed to all those things and then the radical left is the one who went and blew the whole deal up. >> laura: the president also said something about the wall and its current state that made me curious. let's watch. >> a lot of wall has been billed. we don't talk about that. but we might as well start because it's being built right now, big sections of wall. we will continue that. >> laura: i must have missed the wall being built. what wall? where's being built? >> i think what he means is they are upgrading certain parts. >> laura: that's not a wall.
7:31 pm
stop saying it's a wall. i know it's bad because he made the promise but they are not building the wall. so you've got to stop saying that. it undercuts -- he was great. i thought he was great in the oval office. >> there is about 100 miles of wall being built but that's not anywhere near where we need to go to get this job done. so there is a small start but there's a lot more work. >> laura: that's not a lot of the wall. it's not a wall. >> is not the wall border patrol wanted. >> laura: is someone that's telling them that. >> the wall they want is the one they need and the one that should be funded. >> they also want the technology and the tools to keep our border patrol agents. you've seen this and you've highlighted. our border patrol agents are under attack by a lot of the criminals in this caravan. we need the tools to keep our border patrol agent safe for keeping america safe. >> laura: i still say if we don't reform those asylum laws, people pouring in. >> every single member of the
7:32 pm
caravan was offered asylum by mexico and work permits by mexico when they turned it down. >> laura: got to keep the pressure on the democrats. they are on the wrong side of this. >> american people want border security. >> you hit the nail on the head when he said it's an anti-trump agenda. you'll schumer and pelosi, both support sanctuary policies and their state so they want to say tory policy to keep the illegal he leans in they don't want to fund the wall to keep him out. two of the worst people in the oval office even talking about border security. they put their political futures out of this country security which is our number one responsibility. shame on them. >> laura: california and new york. >> they entice people to come here illegally. >> laura: he gives them all the ideas, whenever they want. they get their ids and they get the ability to work. >> come to york or california. >> laura: demonize i.c.e. guardians of the galaxy. i don't think so. great to see you. coming up, what we want to a
7:33 pm
deep hatred at the root of the women's march. there is merge coming up soon. we have an expose that looks into their shocking origins and the democrats that it puts at risk. don't miss this. >> i know we will rise to the challenge, and i know we will keep fighting no matter what. today...
7:34 pm
7:35 pm
back pain can't win. now introducing aleve back and muscle pain. only aleve targets tough pain for up to 12 hours with just one pill. aleve back & muscle. all day strong. all day long.
7:36 pm
>> this is the moment you will remember when women stood strong and stood firm. >> we are tired as women of being relegated to simply being thought of as a particular constituency or demographic. let's buckle in because it's going to be a bumpy ride. >> laura: well, those two suppose a democratic rock stars have become some of the more powerful advocates of the radical group known as the women's march. some new details on how that
7:37 pm
group was started. however, we may have been rethinking their association per trace gallagher's life on the west coast newsroom with a shocking origins story of the group. trace. >> the dichotomy here is -- part of its mission statement the women's march says it's committed to finding anti-semitism and yet two of its leaders and most public figures, tamika mallory and carmen perez, have praised nation of islam leader and known anti-semite was farrakhan. mallory has called him the greatest of all time and was in attendance this year at farrakhan's annual address where he gave tamika mallory a shout out and then proceeded to give a speech replete with anti-semitic and homophobic remarks. the women's march says farrakhan's statements don't align with the group's principles and mallory's presence at his annual address was bad judgment. yet perez and malory have disavowed his comments, and now tablet magazine is reporting that during the women's march
7:38 pm
first meeting back in november of 2016, both mallory and perez endorsed an infamous and debunked anti-semitic trope that jews exploited black and brown people and were proven to be leaders of the american trade. the controversy is also gaining notice because the women's march has become, as you noted, powerful organization that has been endorsed by potential 2020 presidential candidates like california democratic senator kamala harris and new york democratic senator kirsten gillibrand. both of whom spoke at the women's march prerally in january 2017. it's also worth noting that despite allegations of anti-semitism among some leaders, ben cohen and jerry greenfield, the jewish founders of ben & jerry's ice cream, are standing by their partnership with women's march. even marking the partnership with a brand-new flavor. pecan resist.
7:39 pm
laura. >> laura: trace, thanks so much. joining me as ann coulter, conservative commentator. and ladonna jones. democratic state rep in georgia and criminal defense attorney. all right, and, why aren't gill brand and kamala harris and all the other female democratic leaders who back to this group, why aren't they being pressed by any members of the media anytime a step in front of a microphone given the connection between the nation of islam leader farrakhan in this group. there march, you and i should go, it's january 19. coming up. >> totally. i will be there. laura, i thing you know the answer that question. i think you're going to be seeing a lot of these disputes in the democratic party base because they all hate one another. i mean, you have the muslims and the jews and the various exotic sexual groups in the black church ladies with the college queers. the only thing that keeps the
7:40 pm
democratic base together is for them to keep focusing on white men of the ones keeping you down. you must hate white men. it's the one thing they all have in common. so as it becomes increasingly clear that we are not going to get a wall or trumpet filling his immigration policies, the one thing we have to look forward in the new country is ginning up all these hatred and the democratic base. speedy one of the things that was written about the group and this is a new tablet piece. this was by mercy morgan field comments about, she's the d.c. coordinator of the march, said this. bob bland called me secretly and said mercy, they've been in bed with the nation of islam since day one. they do all of our security. is that the group you want doing your security, given the most hateful anti-semitic comments made over the years by farrakha
7:41 pm
farrakhan? calling jews termites most recently in any number of assorted sordid things he's said. >> you know, last time i checked, it's not common. as for the religious preferences of the people who are protecting you. when there are those who are threatening your life to play because you are standing up for a woman's right to vote, a woman's right to equal pay. this is a silly nonstarter by conservatives trying to split a movement they know is externally powerful. they are afraid of this next march coming up because they know it will get even more women, progressive women, into office just like you did in this past election. you guys should come out. you might learn a thing or two. >> laura: we are not the ones making a big deal out of it. i think some of the founders of the march themselves are very concerned about this anti-semitic change within the organization. i think they want the march to be successful, and i don't blame them. they put together an amazing array of people with a huge turnout. but if the shoe were on the other foot and it was a bunch of
7:42 pm
conservatives getting together and all of a sudden the security for the group was like some david duke type guy, you guys would be rightly saying what are you doing? why are you having them do the security? i don't think we would get away, and, with saying they are doing security. we don't ask their political views. >> you don't have to hypothesize it, there's this group the proud boys. they have defended me all over america and by the way, they are quite multiethnic. i don't ask whether religion is. they are attached by being accused of being a group of white men. like i say, that's the only thing that keeps the democratic base together. they keep painting white men. even though the proud boys are not only white men. what are they being attacked for? for defending people like me. >> laura: there's another piece, an article and how will read it. it was there that perez and mallory allegedly first assertee a special collective
7:43 pm
responsibility as exploiters of black and brown people. and even, according to a secondhand source, claimed jews were proven to have been leaders of the american trade." so this is some of the conspiracy theories at the 2016 inaugural women's march meeting. are you concerned about any of that? >> not even remotely concerned. the organizers have all, and it was quoted in the tablet article, they have denied that this event took place. this, again, as just an attempt to try to slow down the movement that conservatives are really afraid of. listen, if you know anything about the women's march or if you look at their website, you see that the entire purpose is intersection analogy. it's about inclusiveness. it's about bringing in people of all races, all genders and all religions to stand up for a common purpose which is american women. i can get why conservatives are concerned because they know there's a tie that binds us as american, worried about our
7:44 pm
children in the economy. it's one of those things you can't split up. >> laura: we just heard kamala harris said she was sick of being treated as a demographic group in that sound bite we bumped in with but that seems like what the women's march is kind of doing to itself. i don't think there were a lot of pro-life democratic women at the march. i don't think so. i don't think i saw many of them showcase. it was more than a celebrity screaming about how they wanted to blow off house. was it diverse? what do you mean diverse? diverse in what way? not intellectual diversity. >> in los angeles, you have mexicans and blacks fighting like banshees. in new york, it's puerto ricans against the dominicans. the idea that you can step forward and say we are for unity and tolerance, no. like i said, this will be the one fun we will have the new country. the great accomplishments of the women's march will be selling a lot of t-shirts. >> laura: we will see what happens. >> we know in 2010 there was a
7:45 pm
record number turnout of women who got to the democratic party. to say that there were all white men who were elected. diversity is part of the story. >> running your partyware is only about 20% of the democratic voters are white men but wow, look at the leadership. look at all the democrats running. your nominee is probably going to be beto o'rourke. there are only a few women even running. white men run your party. if you have anyone to complain to, if the democratic party. >> laura: come on, bernie sanders and joe biden are very diverse. not fair at all. i think the women's march, i don't agree with them but they did turn a lot of people on the republicans of to take a page out of some of the organizing of the democrats. i appreciate the conversation, thanks so much. are we witnessing a 20% reversion of segregation? seriously. wait until you hear about a vacation promotion that bans people from participating based
7:46 pm
on their skin color. the heated debate next.
7:47 pm
7:48 pm
7:49 pm
>> laura: do you know there's something about booming tourism sector focused solely on black people who don't want to be around white people? it's not a joke.
7:50 pm
vice news traveled one of the resorts catering to these customers who say it's their only way to escape racism in the united states. watch. >> the breath then as a reminder that we are safe. >> we needed a safe space that was outside the united states. to hold certain conversations. >> would having white people on the true brunette? >> i don't think we would be as open and as honest as we are with the group we are in now. >> are looking for ways, coping mechanisms, you know, and ways to take care of ourselves. because we are not on the agenda. >> if you like white people shouldn't even have passports, because they've done enough -- especially white americans. leave them in the united states. they do not need to come here. they need to stay in the united states. >> let us have our space. let us have our room. go hang out with other white
7:51 pm
people. we are okay. you've done enough damage. >> laura: my breath is taken away. that woman you just heard is andrea x. she is the founder of the women of color retreat in costa rica that she went on to say that she's not doing this as a type of reverse racism. really? here to debate this, horace cooper and democratic strategist antjuan seawright. horace, if you replace white with any other group, what do you think the reaction would be? i think we are the only ones doing this on cable news which i can't believe. i saw this and i almost fell over. you can't really be serious. now our self segregating, which people can do whatever they want the dental claim that you are all tolerance. >> this is worse than that. this actually is bigotry. this actually is racism. look, what we are talking about is people using justified language in their own minds for saying it's okay not to associate with them or their
7:52 pm
kind. we don't want to travel with them. we don't want them to be able to fly. >> laura: they should stay in the united states, i love that. that was a good one. >> any time that my grandparents would've heard phrases like that, we know what they meant and what they were trying to express. it was separatism. it was you stay over. and we as a nation have come together to recognize that that kind of bigotry and that kind of ignorance shouldn't be welcomed. the last thing i wanted to say,, and that is that we would be seeing boycotts. we would be seeing all -- heads exploding. if expedia allowed you to purchase your whites only cruise, do you understand how seriously the left would take it? >> laura: i want to play something for you. this is more from the retreat cofounder. and this is from again from vice news.
7:53 pm
do we have it? let's listen. >> what would you say to someone who says it sounds like paradise for black people. motivated by the same hate ovoid people who who want to create white nations and white spaces. >> i would say doesn't have anything to do with them. this is about us and our community. >> laura: your thoughts. it's not about racism. >> i don't necessarily agree with the approach and how it was couched. maybe some of her language use. but let's be honest. these things happen. they just may not always be broadcast. the truth of the matter is then again i'm not agreeing with their tactic and what it is, but the truth of the matter is boys have trips all the time in which girls are not allowed. corporations go on retreats et cetera were certain groups are not allowed, where they have extras them. >> laura: corporate? whites only corporations? >> no, i am saying corporate retreats. >> laura: they don't bring the
7:54 pm
competition to their retreat. >> corporate retreats happen when it shows them in their group. >> laura: the leadership of the company. that's not racially exclusive. >> i'm not justifying what she did. i'm saying these exclusive trips happen. again, i think it's wrong. >> laura: look, look, the thing i wanted to get out and i guess we don't have this particular sound bite, but she said every time a have a conversation with white people, just pick up on certain things that they say. i pick up on the micro aggressions, the passive aggressiveness. i pick up on it, so i decided one day just to eliminate white people for my personal life. and ever since then, my life has been way more breezy. that's the founder of this organization. >> it feeds into this narrative and it gives fuel to the fire of racism and hate and bigotry in all the things that divide us in this country. i fundamentally do not agree. >> laura: you not like this, you wouldn't go on this. this is where you just got to say this is ridiculous. >> i'm here with you, laura. >> laura: horace, i think there's something in this that,
7:55 pm
we are at a point where we are supposed to be, everyone is like be cool. different races, different backgrounds, different ethnicities. try to come together. everyone wants to have a solution to something but instead it's you are over there and i'm here. i thought separate but equal wasn't okay. i thought it had to be together. thurgood marshall. >> that's the point. again, imagine what if a group of fraternity members all white, all-male, said they were just going to regularly -- >> let's not -- >> let's see what would happen if someone came out on the news, vice news ran a story about this. those individuals will lose their job. they would lose their jobs, their livelihoods would be changed. >> laura: i am happy to go on vacation with both of you any time, as long as your wives are
7:56 pm
okay. altogether. >> not exclusive. >> laura: inclusive. great idea. great to have you on. coming up, since time routinely disappoints with their pick of person of the year, we reveal "the ingraham angle"'s list next. a hint: it was a tie. stay there.
7:57 pm
7:58 pm
7:59 pm
's pay to "time" magazine, people of the year. we decided to highlight and anger mangle a person of the year. are you ready? it is a tie. the first are the heroic first responders rest life and limb to respond to the tragic and devastating paradise fire out in california.
8:00 pm
amazing. the second are the border agents who despite being constantly maligned go about doing their job and keeping this country safe. spoke to chief rodney scott of the sandy the san diego center. >> this goes out. because that is a nice way to put it. it is frustrating and insulting. a lot of it is a flat out lie. >> laura: congratulations to her agents and our first, always playing serving others above else. the first anger mangle persons of the year. that is all the time we have. shannon bream and "fox news at night" have a jam-packed show. >> shannon: thank you very much. a fox news alert. drawing a red line over border security, the president sets up a countdown for possible government shutdown. a very public clash with democratic leaders over funding for the border walls, he declares he is proud


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on