'The Ingraham Angle' on mask mandates, Dem's infrastructure bill

close

Video

California restaurant only wants unvaccinated customers, owner battles CNN's Cuomo

Tony Roman, owner of California restaurant Basilico's, on the 'hate' he has received for pushing back on mask mandates and vaccination requirements, and his interview on CNN with Chris Cuomo.

This is a rush transcript from "The Ingraham Angle," July 29, 2021. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated. 

INGRAHAM: Judge, thanks so much. I am Laura Ingraham. This is the "Ingraham
Angle" from Washington tonight. We have a lot to get to. So let's dive
right in. Masks and mandates forever. That's the focus of tonight's
"Angle".

Joe Biden and the CDC want you to believe that they've changed their
guidance on masks, because the science has changed.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I've said in the beginning that
we will be guided by the science following the science. We know we can
dramatically lower the cases in this country. We just need to finish the
job with science.

DR. ANTHONY FAUCI, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS
DISEASES: We're not changing the science, the virus changed. And the
science evolved with the changing virus.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: OK. Well, science has not changed. Sure, like all pandemics and
the wind down phase there are viral variants and mutations. But the
science, the immunology has not changed. The variants become more
transmissible, but usually not more deadly, often less so. And that's
Immunology 101.

Now, for many months very smart and apolitical scientists have been saying
that vaccines would never mean zero COVID infections, but instead that they
would help curb hospitalizations and deaths. For 15 months, we've known
that those who die from COVID have at least one if not two, three, or more
serious comorbidities. We've known that the elderly and those with
metabolic syndrome, high BMI, diabetes, hypertension, would suffer the
most.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEPHEN SMITH, SMITH CENTER FOR INFECTIOUS DISEASES: The more we see this
disease, the more we understand that severe rapid COVID disease,
especially, is in diabetics or pre diabetics. We haven't had anyone under
70, who didn't have a very high BMI, or was pre diabetic, get seriously
ill. This is amazing stuff and it's unprecedented.

INGRAHAM: We're finding that a lot of people, officially in these Italian
studies, physicians are saying, we were not even saying necessarily they're
dying of it, but with it, because they had so many underlying conditions.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Now, we've known since last spring that children have an
infinitesimally small chance of dying from COVID. That's good news, unless
they have a serious underlying condition.

The data, unless it's manipulated or framed incorrectly, does not lie.
Countless revered physicians have come on this show to say that there's
zero reason why any of those kids should be forced to wear masks in school,
or on planes, or anywhere. The real science on masks hasn't moved at all.

Now, with all of this as the backdrop, recent Biden administration changes
recommending mass indoors for the vaxxed and the unvaxxed are arbitrary and
disconnected from the science.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARTIN KULLDORFF, HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL PROFESSOR: It's very strange. And
I don't know if we have reached the end of the scientific era here, because
if we look at the data currently the COVID death in the United States is
lower than it has been ever since the pandemic started.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Now. Remember, when Jen Psaki was pressed about how many
breakthrough infections they've had at the White House?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Why won't you just release the number of breakthrough
cases you've had vaccinated staffers?

JEN PSAKI, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Well, I think, first, we're in a
very different place than we were six to seven months ago as it relates to
the virus. And we're in a different place in terms of the impact of
individuals who may have, as you said, breakthrough cases.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: But why not just provide the number? Are you trying to
hide something?

PSAKI: No, but what is the - why do you need to have that information?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Did anyone ever even notice that when it happened on Friday? It's
obvious. They don't seem to think that the case numbers matter, because
they don't report all the cases to the media at the White House. They don't
even track them. But when they want to force masks on us, or vaccinations
and lockdowns, it's all about the case numbers. It's almost only about the
case numbers. But even Biden himself admitted that COVID deaths are way
down nowhere near their peak.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BIDEN: The death rate per day is way down. Remember, just how dark that
winter was. Over 3600 Americans were dying each and every day. Now, even
with the surge among the unvaccinated, we're down to that 300 Americans a
day. Significant.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: OK. From 3000 to 300? So why are we continuing to hold America
hostage for a disease that is overwhelmingly survivable, even in older
Americans, if given the right early therapeutics? Why are we not talking
about the use of vitamin D, of fitness, getting in better shape and diet?

At this point, there is no question that this is in part about controlling
us, not protecting us. Look at Australia, they have very few cases or
deaths. In fact, compared to other countries, they never had all that many
cases. And in Australia, right now, they're locked down for four more weeks
after having been locked down for four weeks previous.

So the lock downs for the left are the policy. They're not the answer or
the solution for a problem. If they were, New York and California would
have led the nation in preventing deaths and hospitalizations long ago. The
media today, though, actually seemed kind of disappointed at the White
House that Biden appeared to, in a way, rule out lockdowns.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You said earlier this week that we are not headed back
towards lockdowns, but if the science is evolving, how can you be so
confident in that?

BIDEN: And if everybody's vaccinated, the existing vaccines work to prevent
death, serious illness, hospitalization. OK. So, if tomorrow I can wave a
wand and every American was vaccinated, then in fact, we'd be out of the
woods.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: OK. That's the bar now? Every - well, the left prefers lockdowns
to life before COVID. They prefer working from home, they're fine with
borrowing as much money as possible to keep paying people not to work. They
think that requiring rent payments is unfair. They think that paying
tuition is unfair. They're fine with punishing and excluding and shaming
Americans who decide for themselves against getting this vaccine. And yes,
they love the masks. They love the face shields, even our Secretary of
Defense. So embarrassing. That's not him wearing the face shield, but you
get the point.

Now, Biden had his chance to bring back the America we love, but he yielded
to the media, the left and the permanent bureaucracy. He made a colossal
mistake by ceding this territory to Fauci and the CDC. But it's patently
obvious that there is no science that is going to compel them to urge
restrictions be lifted, because it's all arbitrary.

CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky makes Dr. Birx look like Madame Curie.
The real question is, how long will the blue state voters put up with this
madness? These mandates aren't going to change the views of conservatives
and independents at all. If anything, they're going to make them trust the
vaccines less. And they see the media clamoring for punishing non-vaxxers,
whether they already have natural immunity or not.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BIDEN: Every federal government employee will be asked to attest to their
vaccination status. Anyone who does not attest or is not vaccinated will be
required to mask, no matter where they work. Test one or two times a week,
and generally will not be allowed to travel for work.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Why not push for vaccine mandates in states, private
companies, schools?

BIDEN: I'd like to see them continue to move in that direction.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Well, of course, so. But there's always going to be the next
thing. 100 percent of America gets vaccinated, Biden cited that earlier,
then would be OK. Not really. What about the boosters? When will those be
the next hurdle?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BIDEN: I also know many of you are wondering if you need a booster shot to
add another layer of protection, as of now, my medical advisors say the
answer is no. No American needs a booster now. But if the science tells us
there's a need for boosters, then that's something we'll do.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: OK. Do you see where this is going? If the science tells us and
the press goes, ooh, isn't this great? He's listening to the science. Well,
did the science hold up his right hand and swear to uphold and defend the
constitution of the United States?

The experts had been playing a game for the past 18 months on this. We were
told we could get past this, get back to normal, or something approaching
normal, to do all these things. We did all these things. And none of it
worked. Did the post 9/11 restrictions ever get lifted? I don't know. Do
you still have to take your shoes off at the airport and you go through
TSA? Did they remove all those surveillance cameras everywhere after 9/11?

COVID is their excuse to do everything that they couldn't push through in
the normal legislative, prosperous - the prosperous and happy times. They
want all of this to roll into 2022 and 2024. They'll cite COVID to justify
the need for more ballot harvesting, and to extend the voting times. I just
don't believe though, that the American people are prepared to live under
this many restrictions and restraints.

I think more people are going to come to realize that there's just no way
out, unless we get new political leadership. Americans will free
themselves. No one's going to do it for them. If this was all about
preventing COVID, they'd be focused on finding out where the virus came
from in the first place to stop the next wave. The FDA wouldn't have
trashed or ignored the very therapeutics and antivirals that speed up
recovery from COVID. They would have shut down the border, not continued to
cede America with COVID via migrants who tested positive.

I want to be as clear about this as possible tonight. The dominant faction
in the Democratic Party does not want life in America to return to normal.
They never liked the old normal. They don't like capitalism much. They
don't even like freedom. They want Americans to shut up and do what they're
told. It doesn't matter how many people take the vaccine, it doesn't matter
what the caseload looks like on any given day. It doesn't matter how much
evidence we have that lockdowns are bad for public health, they do not
care.

And since they control the media, there's always going to be another
variant, another study, another excuse to maintain serious restrictions on
American Life. Even if COVID disappeared completely overnight, they'd
simply use another alleged crisis. Maybe it's climate change, to promote a
similar agenda. The less freedom of speech and expression, the better. The
higher the gas prices are, the better.

The Democrats' efforts to change America through these draconian policies,
through runaway spending and endless borrowing will long outlast COVID.
They won't stop when the science tells them to stop. They're only going to
stop when the election returns tell them to. A Reagan era wipe out in 1980,
in 1984, would look good right about now. And that's the "Angle".

Here now is Dr. Peter McCullough, internist, cardiologist, and
epidemiologist. We're going to get to how the strong arm of the COVID law
is coming after you in a moment. But first, The Washington Post just got
its hands on internal CDC documents that say is leading to this updated
guidance, Dr. McCullough. And the data claims that the Delta variant in a
vaccinated person may be as contagious as with an unvaccinated person.

But Doctor, you heard what Biden said today, if 100 percent of Americans
get the vaccine, we're going to somehow stop the spread. How does that make
sense given the data that's pouring in right now?

PETER MCCULLOUGH, MD, MPH, INTERNIST: We had four major things that evolved
over the last few weeks. We had a wedding in Houston, where everyone was
vaccinated; we had a Democratic legislative plane flight from Texas to
Washington; we had a British naval vessel where all the sailors were
vaccinated. And in fact, in all of those circumstances, there are cases
that emerged of COVID.

And now a paper by Farinholt and colleagues from Baylor College of Medicine
in Houston has demonstrated, indeed, patients who are fully vaccinated can
actually acquire, carry and transmit the Delta variant of COVID-19.

INGRAHAM: So when Biden goes out there and says, I'll repeat the question,
if 100 percent of Americans get vaccinated, we're not going to have this
problem. You won't have to be in masks. What's that mean?

MCCULLOUGH: Israel has over 80 percent of people fully vaccinated right now
as of July 23. In the last week, over 5000 cases, they have 84 percent of
the cases are fully vaccinated. So it's clear, we can't vaccinate our way
out of this.

INGRAHAM: So, in other words, the therapeutics that you and I have
discussed time and again, we have ivermectin being used all over the world
with some pretty good results. Obviously, hydroxychloroquine with pretty
good results. Dr. Smith's data on that is stunning. Vitamin D, being in
better shape, early intervention.

If you get COVID, if you're decently - in decent health, you should be OK
with it overwhelmingly. Again, that's the data. Is it not, Dr. McCullough?

MCCULLOUGH: It's true. We should be always focusing on the 1 percent of
Americans who get COVID-19. High risk seniors should get monoclonal
antibody infusions and the sequence drug approach that I've published on
and really help the world come up with an outpatient treatment from COVID-
19, reduces hospitalization and death by 85 percent.

INGRAHAM: Now, and the vaccine obviously has some positive effect on
seriousness of illness, but it won't end the mandates that they came up
with this week. There's no way, according to their ever-shifting metrics.

All right. Doctor, I have to get to this one. Now, one of the things that's
come out of this entire COVID debate is the intimidation and retribution
campaigns we've seen against medical experts. I'm talking about renowned
experts who speak against the conventional wisdom.

Now, Biden himself engaged in a little bit of this from the podium today.
Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BIDEN: But I want you to know, I'm going to continue to do everything I can
to encourage the unvaccinated to get vaccinated. That includes addressing
hesitancy and misinformation head on.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Now, almost in tandem with Biden's announcement, the Federation
of State Medical Boards announced today that "Physicians and other health
care professionals could be at risk, Dr. McCullough, of losing their
medical licenses, if they spread what they deem to be COVID-19 vaccine
misinformation on social media, online and in the regular media."

OK. Dr. McCullough, I understand that you too have been targeted. Tell us
what happened to you regarding your professorship at Texas A&M.

MCCULLOUGH: Well, the same day that Baylor Scott & White announced that it
was going to have a mass vaccination program, they slapped me with a
lawsuit. And I can tell you, Baylor Scott & White health system, I've been
with them a long time. They're a first class organization. My wife and I
are major donors to the foundation. And I have never gone out in the media
or in scientific meetings, and falsely represented the organization, or
Texas A&M, or any of the university they hold a position at. Like any other
scientist, I'm giving my opinions based on the data. And you can tell, I am
pinpoint with these citations.

INGRAHAM: Yes. So they're claiming that when you say that some of these
other therapeutics may be helpful. There are breakthrough infections, which
they've admitted there are a significant number of breakthrough infections
and spread, that you're spreading misinformation and representing the
university. Is that what Baylor and Texas A&M are claiming?

MCCULLOUGH: Yes. They are basically trying to paint me as a vaccine
skeptic. And I can tell you, I'm just reporting the data. Fact checkers
check me, Laura, and I can tell you table five of the UK 19 variant report
has shown 229 cases - 229,000 cases at Delta. I can tell you right now that
48 percent of them are fully vaccinated. Of the 460 who have died with
Delta, 0.2 percent mortality rate; of the 460, 65 percent are fully
vaccinated. These data are pinpoint. Any fact checker can tell them. I'm
just giving and trying to help America understand the pandemic.

INGRAHAM: Well, data doesn't lie if it's just presented fairly. Dr.
McCullough, thank you.

Now, the left isn't just trying to control you with COVID restrictions in
perpetuity, it's now hoping to take states to court if they fight back. The
DOJ is warning that states could face legal action if they roll back any
COVID era voting rules, like unfettered absentee and male-in voting.

Now, it turns out that after all the accusations about President Trump
weaponizing the DOJ, it's the Biden administration deploying these kind of
intimidation forces.

Joining us now is Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law Prof., Emeritus author of
"The Case Against the New Censorship". Alan, explain why this is
unconstitutional.

ALAN DERSHOWITZ, HARVARD LAW PROFESSOR EMERITUS: Well, the Justice
Department has the right to enforce the voting laws, I don't think they
have the right to demand that states stick with COVID instituted voting
rules that were designed specially for COVID. But they can't restrict
voting.

I mean, we all have the same goals. We want every possible eligible voter
to come to the polls and vote, and we want no non-eligible voters to come
to the polls to vote. The Justice Department should enforce the voting
laws. If they tried to extend the voting laws, for example, if they tried
to knock down identification, mandatory identification, the Supreme Court
will strike that down. So we have the Justice Department on the one hand,
but we have the Supreme Court overseeing the Justice Department.

Again, the goal, everybody who's eligible should vote, nobody who's
ineligible shouldn't vote. How to strike the appropriate ballots is very
difficult. As far as mandating vaccination, I think the Supreme Court would
uphold gradual mandating of vaccination. That is first. Conditioning going
to school on getting vaccinated, conditioning getting on airplanes,
conditioning going to crowded buildings. Ultimately, if it became
absolutely necessary, they would quote George Washington in the middle of
the Revolutionary War, who mandated vaccination against smallpox for--

INGRAHAM: Are you saying that COVID-19, Alan, hold on. Are you saying -
see, I disagree with this analysis. COVID-19 is not smallpox. I don't think
you have to overrule the Jacobson case. You can distinguish the Jacobson
case on the basis of the data, mortality, the - how infectious this is, how
many people it kills. This is not smallpox. So - and this is not a fully
approved - it's not a fully approved vaccine either.

DERSHOWITZ: Neither was the smallpox vaccine in 1905. No, I think COVID is
worse than smallpox in many ways. It may not kill as many people, but we
don't know what the long-term impact is. I have to--

INGRAHAM: Killed 300 million people worldwide. 300 million people.

DERSHOWITZ: I know. I have the right to get on an airplane and know that
everybody on that airplane is vaccinated or tested. You may have the right
not to get vaccinated. But you have no right to spread the disease to me
even if you won't kill me, even if you won't kill me. I don't want long-
term impact.

(CROSSTALK)

INGRAHAM: This is Harvard Law School. OK.

DERSHOWITZ: I believe you.

INGRAHAM: I didn't go to Harvard Law School, but I did hear the President
today, talk about how if you're vaccinated, you spread the virus. You still
can spread the virus. I mean, the data out of Israel, the data in the UK,
they're freaking out about this.

DERSHOWITZ: It'll be spread much less seriously. Look, we don't know what
we don't know.

INGRAHAM: OK. You can deprive people of their constitutional rights on the
basis of a vaccine that's still allows the spread of a virus.

DERSHOWITZ: There's no constitutional right to get on an airplane and to
spread the disease to me even if it's not going to be fatal.

INGRAHAM: OK. All right.

DERSHOWITZ: I have constitutional right, you have constitutional rights and
the court has got to balance it.

INGRAHAM: I get you. It's not smallpox. Professor, thank you.

Now, why are some Republicans voting to move forward with President Biden's
infrastructure plan? We're going to ask one of them, Senator Lindsey Graham
in moments.

Plus, how does the White House solve a problem like Kamala? More, coming
up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: The Biden White House is jubilant over its infrastructure
framework, calling it historic. So why the 17 Republicans who voted to
advance the bill, throwing Biden a lifeline? Here now is one of those 17
Republicans, Senator Lindsey Graham.

Senator, this is a trillion-dollar bill. At a time we're facing massive
inflation, other pressures and President Trump said, you guys have made a
terrible deal that Republicans are big losers here, and that the Democrats
are the big winners. So why is he wrong?

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): I think he's wrong, because he had a bill for
$1.7 trillion infrastructure spending, which I support. We can never get it
done. This is $1.2 trillion for roads, bridges and ports. And if you don't
think we've got a road bridge and port problem, you're not looking at
America the way it is. The $3.5 trillion bill they want to fall on with is
socialism.

But count me in for road, bridges and ports paid for. I understand what I'm
for, and I understand what I'm against. And I think America--

INGRAHAM: You think it's the same economy? You think this is the same
economy as it was when President Trump was in office? That inflationary
pressures that we're seeing today have no effect on the spending and that
this is not a glide path to make at least $3 trillion of spending possible?
It gives a huge win to the White House. They're thrilled.

GRAHAM: Yes. I really don't believe that at all (inaudible) We're spending
the money in [ph] and out years. There is deinflationary. We're putting
money aside for an eight-year road bridge, port plan to upgrade, what I
just said, that doesn't create inflation. What creates inflation is the
$3.5 trillion bill.

INGRAHAM: What are you going to get?

GRAHAM: That's just government spending with tax increases. I don't know.
We'll see. I see many differ on this. I think America needs infrastructure
and forward. I think America doesn't need socialism. I'm against it.

INGRAHAM: But why don't you senator, why don't you - but Senator, why
didn't you do what Pelosi played hardball, and you guys rolled over? Why
didn't you say we'll vote on infrastructure once you show your hand on the
$3.5 trillion? Why are we giving the leverage to the Democrats on the
process?

Pelosi is like, we're not doing that. We're doing it the other way. And you
guys are like, ok. We'll just do the reinfrastructure first.

GRAHAM: Yes. I think you nailed something. So follow this. It's going to
pass the Senate with Democratic and Republican support, the $3.5 trillion
bill won't get any Republican support. What does Nancy Pelosi do? Does she
hold that bipartisan bill hostage? Does she give the $3.5 trillion
socialist wish list? Good luck with that, Nancy. She's going to merge the
two bills. And I think it collapses in the house. It'd be a shame if we
can't do something good for America, because she wants $3.5 trillion
dollars to socialize the country. We'll see how this plays out in the
house.

INGRAHAM: So you think the order of these bills was correct? Doing the
infrastructure first, and then letting them tackle the $3.5 trillion, which
she said, that's not going to apply? OK.

GRAHAM: In the Senate, I think Sinema and Manchin are going to be less
likely to do a $3.5 trillion bill if we can do a bipartisan bill for $1
trillion dedicated to real infrastructure. We will see how that plays out.

I think Nancy Pelosi is making a big mistake. She's going to insist the
socialist bill pass first. Good luck with that. And she's going to throw
the bipartisan bill all over and hold it hostage. And I hope Kevin McCarthy
will hold the troops and say we are not going to play that game.

INGRAHAM: Senator, we hope it works out that way.

GRAHAM: Hang in there. Hang in there.

INGRAHAM: I don't think Joe Manchin, I don't think he is going to be
standing up against anything here, but thank you.

Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton, he voted against this infrastructure bill. He
joins me now. Senator, what did Lindsey Graham get wrong in his analysis,
or get right?

SEN. TOM COTTON, (R-AR): Laura, the reason I voted against proceeding to
this bill, first, is I guess you can call me old fashion. I think we should
have a bill to review and be able to study carefully. Since we voted
yesterday, I gather there's some backstage last-minute negotiations
happening. I just don't think that is the right way to start on any piece
of legislation.

Second, it's clear that Chuck Schumer and Joe Biden are trying to ram this
bill through, but they do want to get to their $3.5 trillion blow out
spending bill that will try to transform America into a socialist nation
with reckless taxing and spending. But there's no rush here. We are not up
against a deadline. The government is not about to close. The trips are not
about to lose their pay. There is no reason to rush a bill like this. We
should be focused on getting it right, not getting it fast.

INGRAHAM: And Senator, speaking of the president's goals, he let it slip
tonight. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: How did you meeting on DACA go?

JOE BIDEN, (D) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It went very well. I think
we should include in the reconciliation bill the immigration proposal. My
staff is putting out a message right now.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: OK, Senator, the reconciliation bill, it grows by the day.
Permanent entitlements, family medical leave, universal preschool, and now
mass immigration amnesty.

COTTON: It's bad enough that they have this reckless taxing and spending
scheme. Now they want to include amnesty for millions of illegal aliens at
a time when we already have a million new illegal aliens because of Biden's
border crisis. It would be the height of folly to tell the world when they
are already rushing our borders that if you get here in time, you too might
get an amnesty, and if you don't get it this time, you will get it next
time around. That's why we have to fight with every fiber of our being to
stop this bill and to especially stop it from giving amnesty to millions of
illegals at a time we have such a massive border crisis.

INGRAHAM: I just think we have message inflationary pressures in our
country today. The idea that we need to spend $4.5 trillion additional
dollars when all we need to do is open up this country and get rid of all
these ridiculous mandates, it's insane. We are just destroying the future
generation of our country, destroying it.

COTTON: That's right, Laura. And Biden and the Democrats are causing
inflation, not just by spending trillions of dollars we don't have, but as
you point out, they are also locking up the supply side of our economy.
When people won't go back to work because as Uncle Sam is giving them a
$300 bonus every year, or they're still facing social distancing
requirements, or governors are starting to slap new mask mandates back on
them, the Biden Democrats get you coming and going. They spend more money
than we have, and they also don't allow our economy to open back up and get
people back to work so they can start producing the goods that Americans
want to buy. That is why we have inflation in this country. It is 100
percent because of Joe Biden's health policies.

INGRAHAM: Senator, do you think Manchin and Sinema are going to stand up to
Schumer and say no to this bill, or do you think ultimately this thing gets
through?

COTTON: I can't speak for my colleagues, Laura. I will say there is a lot
of snot beyond the Democratic Party up there on Capitol Hill these days,
because it is not just senators, either. You've got a lot of House
Democrats are unhappy that this bill doesn't spend even more money and
doesn't have even more reckless tax increases in it. So I think they've got
a lot of rocky shoals that they're going to have to navigate in the months
ahead, and the best thing for America would be not to pass a multitrillion
dollar bill that is going to continue to drive up inflation and continuing
harming this economy.

INGRAHAM: It's insane. Ultimately the Democrats always stick together in
the end. Thank you, Senator.

The teary performances from the two Adams earlier this week kicked off an
interesting debate. When is it appropriate for men to cry in public? The
catalyst for this social media firestorm, Matt Walsh is here next with a
helpful guide. Stay there.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ADAM KINZINGER (R-IL): I never expected the day to be quite as
emotional for me as it has been. You guys won. You guys held.

REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D-CA): Adam, I didn't expect this would be quite so much,
either. But it must be an Adam thing today.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: That pathetic display kicked off a debate spurred by our next
guest about whether real men cry in public. Joining me now is Matt Walsh,
host of "The Matt Walsh Show." Matt, what's wrong with men showing kind of
their sensitive, vulnerable side in public. Why is that a problem?

MATT WALSH, HOST, "THE MATT WALSH SHOW": I do think it's been interesting
that I said men shouldn't cry in public, and lots of men have responded to
that statement by crying in public, which hasn't really made me rethink my
original assertion. And by the way, I think I'm being generous here. I did
say there are some exceptions, like if a loved one dies, or you come home
from a long deployment, hugging your children, you get your arm stuck in a
woodchipper, you're watching the end of the movie "Rudy." There are a
couple other exceptions. Maybe I could publish an actual guide and if a man
feels like he is about to cry, he can consult that guide to find out if it
is a sanctioned sobbing fit or not. I could possibly do that if I need to.

My real point, though, I think it's a pretty simple one. It's just that men
should try to control their emotions. You could go too far on the stoicism
end of it, but right now we are airing way on the other side of that
extreme. Just try to control your emotions and not cry all the time. People
react to that, though. It's like one of the many commonsense statements you
can make these days. People react to it. They don't just disagree. They
react to it like it's the most insane, outrageous thing they've ever heard.
There were guys threatening me physical harm because I told them not to
cry, and they were crying while they said it. So I wasn't really worried
about it, but it is a pretty crazy reaction.

INGRAHAM: There are some really tough guys who occasionally, just the
emotion of the overcomes them. One of my favorites is Brett Favre.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(CRYING)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: OK, he was retiring, and that's emotional. Don't women -- I'm
thinking, do women love that? Maybe they do. He was torn up. He was so torn
up, he joined the Jets, Matt. I'm just teasing.

WALSH: I will allow that. If you're retiring from an athletic career, all
that. Just don't retire from your career in the middle of the competition,
as we learned this week. That's another thing I would recommend.

INGRAHAM: How about crying at your daughter's wedding, it seems like that
would be an acceptable moment, yes?

WALSH: This is why I need to publish the guide that people can consult
before they -- and yes, I would agree that that is another acceptable
occasion. There are maybe two or three others.

INGRAHAM: Speaking of crying, Don Lemon. He sobs on T.V. quite frequently.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CORNELL WEST, PROFESSOR: We've got to self-respect, we've got to self-
defense, and we intervene when you start killing us like that.

DON LEMON, CNN HOST, "DON LEMON TONIGHT": I'm sorry.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Matt, that was not when he looked at his last ratings book. That
was actually heartfelt.

WALSH: And that was a mean comment, that might make him cry some more.
We've got to be careful. There are a lot of men with fragile emotion these
days, and I think that is what we are learning.

INGRAHAM: Matt, I'm sure everyone is going to be triggered by this
conversation. Thank you. Keep calm, and carry tissues.

Could a social justice obsessed Olympics hurt American athletes for years
to come? My next guest is an Olympic commentator and former Olympian
himself. Comments next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: The Olympic Games historically deliver great American stories,
and of course showcase our pride in our nation. But instead, they have been
engulfed in everything but this year. It began with hammer thrower Gwen
Berry turning her back on the American flag during the National Anthem at
the Olympic trials. And then it continued with track star Noah Lyles
raising his fist in solidarity with Black Lives Matter at the same trials,
and then culminated in the women's soccer national team of course taking a
knee before their first match against Sweden where, by the way, they lost.

I'm sure the games themselves have been marked by some great moments, and
we love. But the bulk of the coverage seems to have revolved around COVID
or underwhelming results, and now, of course, mental health. And viewers
are voting with their remotes. Ratings have plummeted almost, I guess now
50 percent since 2016.

Joining me now is Eli Bremer, who competed in the 2008 Beijing Olympics and
is now an Olympic commentator. Eli, great to see you. You say the social
justice movement among athletes is having a negative effect on all
athletes, whether they are involved in social justice causes or not.
Explain that.

ELI BREMER, FORMER OLYMPIAN: Laura, what winds up happening is when these
athletes, who are becoming known for what they are doing off the field of
play or on the field of play about social justice, when they take a knee at
a stadium, it takes away from all the other athletes who are having
incredible performances on the world's greatest stage, and I think that's
very disappointing.

We shouldn't be talking about this. We should be talking about the hometown
girl or boy that goes to the grandest stage and wins an Olympic gold medal
for the greatest nation on earth.

INGRAHAM: A new poll just out from Monmouth actually found that 36 percent
of Americans were less interested in these games that are delayed,
obviously, in the 2021 games are delayed because of the situation with 2020
and COVID. And out of the 36 percent who are less interested, 30 percent
said it was due to the pandemic, and 34 percent, Eli, said it was due to
politics. And then the polling director went on to say this, "The Olympic
spirit is a bit dampened this year. The emergence of Black Lives Matter in
the sports world has also led to a backlash among some Americans." So he
went right to the BLM point, which I found, frankly, depressing.

BREMER: Laura, people watch sports for inspiration. They don't watch sports
to be preached to or to have people pick their own social justice cause.
Sports have historically been unifying. They brought people together. You
don't look at someone based on their race or gender or ethnicity in sports.
You look at them and marvel at the wonders of the human body and
athleticism. And this year with the wokeness that has taken over, we are
talking about that. And again, that has diminished the Olympics. It's
diminished sports.

INGRAHAM: Eli, the other morning, a fairly prominent sportswriter I think
really captured very well the current attitude among many new athletes.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WILLIAM RHODEN, ESPN SPORTSWRITER: I love the opening ceremonies. Then I
just realized, man, particularly after these last four years, I had it
wrong. Nationalism is not good. We've seen the rise of white nationalism.
Nationalism is not good. And also, this whole idea, I keep thinking back on
the Capitol riots, and I saw a lot of U.S. flags.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Eli, shouldn't national pride be kind of a thing that we all --
one of a few things we can all say, good on you, great thing, awesome, love
your country. But now that shouldn't be part of the Olympics. What?

BREMER: Laura, the greatest moment of my life was walking down inside the
stadium at the Beijing Olympics with team USA chanting "USA, USA," and
walking onto the field and representing the greatest country on the planet.
You know what, America is a great country. The Olympics can showcase that.
And yes, nationalism is great. You should be proud of your country. If
you're not proud of your country, find another country to compete in.

INGRAHAM: Eli, as a pentathlete, so you had to master, obviously, five
sports, a lot of stress, a lot of pressure. And does it get to you? Did it
get to you? Did you see the mental health issues that we are releasing a
lot of this Olympics with Simone Biles and others back when you were
competing?

BREMER: I think there has already been issues behind the scenes. There's
two aspects that can get in the way of an athlete competing. One is sort of
that focus, the difficult level of focus that you have. And then obviously
the other is the emotional piece of it. I don't know which piece is
affecting Simone Biles. I will tell you, it is very concerning to me that
we're seeing an uptick of that. I don't know if it's because of COVID or
anything else, but it's disturbing. And it's another storyline that I think
is taking away from great stories at the Olympics.

INGRAHAM: I agree, and the idea that someone would spend all their waking
hours, or many of their waking hours, getting ready and then walking away,
they don't do so likely. There's a lot going on. And I have enormous
respect for you, Eli, for not only what you accomplished all those years
ago, but I know you are looking to get into politics and maybe even in the
Senate against Michael Bennet. We will be following that race as well as it
develops. Eli, great to see you tonight, thank you.

BREMER: Thank you, Laura.

INGRAHAM: Coming up, could there really be another world leader as bumbling
as Biden? The Last Bite reveals it, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(LAUGHTER)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Doesn't that always happen to you? Mr. Bean might be a U.K.
legend, but he has nothing on this guy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(LAUGHTER)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Even the umbrella is locking down in the U.K.

That's all the time we have the night. Remember, Freedom Matters. We have
cool new trucker hats made in the USA, all profits going to charity, this
to Horatio Alger's Scholarship fund. And for the gals, we've got pink. So
these are cool, aren't. So go to https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__LauraIngraham.com&d=DwICAg&c=uw6TLu4hwhHdiGJOgwcWD4AjKQx6zvFcGEsbfiY9-EI&r=kJ8f_Q6dvX3AsDP-NC79Q-X4IyH70YKVhyH4eVON4dc&m=n_Rt2YMFB008_uU1g1rw9m1S5MMMHxGRvAT-HhrlLvo&s=cHXP-vXH7HovmRmkkQ0EzqdKGbiGv1SlVUgD8jURUB0&e= , do a good thing, made
in the USA, all for a great cause.

Gutfeld is next.

Content and Programming Copyright 2021 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL
RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2021 VIQ Media Transcription, Inc. All
materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not
be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast
without the prior written permission of VIQ Media Transcription, Inc. You
may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from
copies of the content.