Notre Dame mother pens letter against girls wearing leggings

close

Video

Notre Dame mother pens letter against girls wearing leggings

Students react by wearing leggings in protest; Raymond Arroyo breaks down his 'Friday Follies' for 'The Ingraham Angle.'

This is a rush transcript from "The Ingraham Angle," March 29, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

LAURA INGRAHAM, HOST: I'm Laura Ingraham and this is “The Ingraham Angle” from a very busy Washington tonight. Big news from the Attorney General today, despite Democrat claims of a cover-up, Bill Barr is now saying that the full report will be released in just weeks. Another narrative of the Left is dead.

And in moments we're going to take you inside the Mueller negotiations with Donald Trump's legal team. New details reveal why obstruction of justice was always going to be a non-starter for the Special Counsel.

Plus hate crime hoaxer Jussie Smollett is about to be celebrated by Hollywood at the NAACP Awards. So today the responsibility to shut this thing down, Donna Brazile will be attending, and is here tonight to debate.

Plus Raymond Arroyo will explore a leggings appropriate in church, what to name the Royal baby and a fight over who is the world's tallest politician - really? OK. Yes - on "Friday Follies" ahead.

But we begin tonight with the mad media rush to find the elusive next scandal. Yes. The week began on kind of a somber note for our friends in the press. They had had to deliver the terrible news that the President of the United States did not conspire with the foreign government to steal an American election.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR: Attorney General William Barr says that the Special Counsel found no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

SHIMON PROKUPECZ, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: They found no evidence that the Russians and people with Trump and Trump campaign colluded with the Russians.

VAN JONES, CNN HOST: There is an honest level of sadness and disappointment and disorientation.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Now looks like the dogs died or something - all of their dogs died, because they'll depressed. Well, in the aftermath of a two-year non- stop hype machine, you might think that take a moment and examine their errors, little introspection, a little thinking about what went wrong, everything that caused them to overreach.

Well, if you thought that, you'd be wrong. Because now they moved on to cover all the new Trump scandals. Well, the media claims that this is all about accountability. But to the rest of us their story choices are obvious. Inflict as much pain in the President as possible, no matter how minuscule the story.

Well you don't believe me? Now take a look at some of the new scandals that are trying to cook up after the Mueller let down. First, here's Anderson Cooper with an alert.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: Much more breaking news tonight. Up next the President's nominee for Interior Secretary gets grilled about our report last night.

Senator the questions surrounding Bernhardt issuing drilling permit during the government shutdown, some which went to his former clients, do you buy his reasoning as to why he did that?

SEN. MAZIE HIRONO, D-HI: Anderson, he has a list in his pocket of all the people that he's not supposed to have contact with. And we also learned that he doesn't keep a schedule and yet in his testimony he said he's met with all these environmental people. How does he even know that, if he doesn't keep a schedule?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: He doesn't keep a schedule. Oh my gosh, arrest him. Oh, it gets better. Still reeling from being exposed as a tinfoil hat wearer after her Russia theories, all fell flat. Rachel Maddow has a new conspiracy to unravel.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RACHEL MADDOW, MSNBC HOST: The Trump administration actually has no plan to go back to the moon, and part of the reason we know this is because Mike Pence admitted it in another awkward part of his speech. He was just going there to give them a speech and somebody told him, "Hey maybe we could do that", a couple minutes before he walked onto stage and so he hoped announcing it would make him look like JFK - maybe.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: At least she didn't actually call into question the moon landing, that's good. Come on, at the end of the day, nothing ever compares to though your first love - what really got you going, the butterflies, the goose bumps, struggling to catch your breath, it's all such a rush.

Come on, to the Left, Mueller, Trump and Russia are still the thing. They just can't quit Russia. So like clockwork this is how they ended the week.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NICOLLE WALLACE, MSNBC HOST: The report is at least 300 pages long. This story is as good as it's going to get for Donald Trump right now.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We have mister Barr's version of what is criminal and not. But maybe Mr. Mueller's assessment of the evidence suggests something else.

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN HOST: And they know there are bad things coming their way.

Mueller couldn't make a call on obstruction that means there has to be evidence of wrongdoing that he was worried about. It has to be true on even with Russian interference. There has to be wrongdoing--

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: He'd feel sorry for these folks if they hadn't done such damage to the presidency in the country, but they were exposed as frauds in their coverage of the collusion question. And now they're essentially just wish casting conclusions on the Mueller report, so they haven't learned anything.

So to believe the theories with that all of them that we just played, one must hold the following that, Bill Barr, a longtime acquaintance of Robert Mueller and a George H. W. Bush Republican, twisted the conclusions to favor Trump in the report.

And further, one must believe that Mueller, whose office came out to correct the media on another occasion, has chosen to sit on his hands and let Barr apparently just get away with blatant lying to the public.

To answer the conspiracy theorists, we thought, we'd invite some people on who actually understand how these things work. So joining me now is Sol Wisenberg, Former Whitewater Deputy Independent Counsel and Fox News Contributor; Guy Lewis, a former U.S. Attorney who served with Attorney General Barr at the DOJ; and Jon Sale, Former Assistant Special Watergate Prosecutor.

OK guys, this big breaking news today was that Barr is going to release the report - I guess, latest mid-April or maybe even earlier. So Sol what do you make of the freakout that we saw from Democrats and some of the media that Barr was going to be, if not now, hiding something.

SOL WISENBERG, FORMER DEPUTY INDEPENDENT COUNSEL: Well Barr, kind of, reminds me a little bit of Br'er Rabbit - throw me into that brier patch, Speaker Pelosi.

Barr made it clear all along that the four-page report or letter he wrote was just interim. That he was going to try to release as much as possible. Now, of course, he said he's going to release about 400 pages. And I believe, contrary to what the montage you played of the Democratic speakers, I believe the report is going to help President Trump, from what I've been able to divine.

For example, it's going to show all of the notes and information and evidence they turned over and the witnesses they made available to Bob Mueller on the obstruction and collusion questions. So I think they are wrong across the board here.

INGRAHAM: Guy, I want to go to you. Joe Scarborough at MSNBC was one of these people - and the reason we're playing these sound bites is because, we think it's really important for the American people to know who is giving them false information - repeatedly false information or false prognostications about issues.

This is what he was saying about the Mueller report, let's watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE SCARBOROUGH, MSNBC HOST: They are trying to defend the indefensible. They are hiding behind Donald Trump's own Roy Cohn, William Barr - yes, I said it. Donald Trump's own Roy Cohn, who squeezes together a couple of Simmons' fragments and puts it in the letter, while trying to keep from the American people the Mueller report. And they set themselves up to look like fools every single day.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Guy, you know Barr really well, without using the word fool to describe the aforementioned host of a morning show, what are your thoughts? Barr is just Roy Cohn to Trump?

GUY LEWIS, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY: Oh, my lord - I just - it's almost hard for me to listen to that with a straight face. I got to tell you this is a guy - this is an Attorney General, former Attorney General, current Attorney General, who straight as an arrow.

We've worked with him. I've worked with him when we were trying Noriega down here in Miami. That guy as the Attorney General was super engaged. He crossed "T's", he dotted "I's". He cared deeply about making sure we did things right and proper. He followed the law, he followed the facts.

I mean the guy was everything - everything that you could want in an Attorney General. And to suggest - here's what really just is hard for me to believe. To put out a straightforward, no nonsense letter, which you read it, I'm sure you read it and others read it.

It was so non-lawyer. And it came out and it said basically, look, let me quote from the Mueller report, "There is no evidence of collusion". Not there is weak evidence, the evidence is questionable, some could read it one way, another way. There is no evidence - zero evidence.

Having been a prosecutor for a long time, I cannot think of a Grand Jury investigation that I conducted that went on for two years and I concluded at the end of that investigation that there was no evidence - zero evidence.

INGRAHAM: Jon, I want to go to you, because we're learning more about the internal struggle. Special Counsel desperately wanted to get Trump in an interview. They wanted to - they were thinking of subpoena him. They wanted testimony from Trump, because they couldn't get anything on obstruction.

But they - there was there was a back-and-forth and a former lawyer John Dowd for Trump, is speaking out for the first time since the end of the Mueller investigation. He spoke with Byron York in a new podcast. And he - again, he took us inside the back-and-forth on this deal with trying to interview the President.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN DOWD, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY: He said, "Well, John, I need to know what was in the President's head." I said, "You already do. You know in real time. "

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: In other words what you're worried about he did it on camera, like it was - like you're not - what are you worried about - like. So they were never going to get Trump to be interviewed.

JON SALE, FORMER ASSISTANT SPECIAL WATERGATE INVESTIGATOR: Laura, I was on your show last Friday night and I said, "Why isn't the President entitled to the presumption of innocence?" I recognize it's not a court of law. But 36 hours later we get, as Guy referred to, no collusion.

Regarding a statement from the President, let me say something, and I would ask Guy to confirm this. When somebody's conduct is being looked at, whether you want to call them a subject, whatever the lawyer's terminology is, prosecutors conduct every single day thorough investigations, they leave no stone unturned and they conclude their investigation one way or the other. They indict no they don't indict without a statement from the person they're investigating.

Rudy Giuliani, I'll disclose he's my friend, but he said on one show a few months ago, "Although, the President said he had no problem giving them a statement, it would be over Rudy's dead body". Well, Rudy did a heck of a better job and so did Jay Sekulow then a lot of the critics have been very, very brutal to them.

They didn't need a statement they gather evidence of intent - corrupt intent through surrounding circumstances, they never get the statement of a subject. So this is all just a red herring--

INGRAHAM: Yes, yes.

SALE: --which is part of the --

INGRAHAM: Yes. It's fact. But I think it's fascinating, Dowd also recalled what he had told the Special Counsel's Office when, I guess, Mueller's team threatened - and I'll have Sol go on this - threatened to subpoena Trump. Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN DOWD, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY: --said, "Well go ahead. I want to hear what you tell the court is your basis to do it when you don't have a crime, you've just told me that this guy doesn't have any exposure, OK?

And so what are you going to tell a U.S. District Judge? Because we're going to move to quash this thing and Jay Sekulow and his team were ready to do it I mean it - tremendous constitution lawyers. We're ready to do it if you want to do it." So he dropped it, then he backed off. He said, "don't get upset".

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Sol, you've got on the other side of this. Did the President's team not play this brilliantly? It seems like they did to me. They said go ahead and they balked in the Special Counsel's Office.

WISENBERG: Well, they knew the law. And is you recall, I was on your show several times back during this period. And I said, if I were advising the President I would not have him go in and talk to Bob Mueller. And I also discussed the SP case, which is the controlling law in the D.C. Circuit, which Dowd discussed, which said you just - you can't just come in and subpoena the President. You've got to make a predicate showing.

And one thing that Dowd reveals, which is very important in that in that interview with Byron is that, part of the SP test, is you've first got to show there's a serious crime.

INGRAHAM: Right.

WISENBERG: --and Mueller had just come in and said - at least with respect to the President there - he said he's a witness. There is no crime. And I thought that there was a real chance that he would lose Mueller if he took it to court and it would certainly take a lot of time. So I think it was exactly the right strategy.

And if I could point something else out, it's not just - Dowd made an earlier statement that they gave them a lot of evidence. They gave them hundreds of pages of contemporaneous notes from Don McGahn to - I forget the lady's name, I think Ann Donaldson or Annie Donaldson - they gave contemporaneous notes of the President.

And Donald McGahn discussing the case, they handed all of that over to Mueller, that's very strong evidence of intent. I would rather have contemporaneous notes of what the President said than what he's thinking about a year later.

INGRAHAM: Bingo. I'm so glad you raised that Sol. Thank you so much panel, all of you fantastic as always.

And now the refrain from the media and the Democrats about the crisis at our border has been, eerily consistent the past few weeks.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There is no crisis at the border.

JOE LOCKHART, FORMER WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Illegal immigration is at historical lows. There is no crisis at the border.

CHUCK TODD, MSNBC HOST: Where's the crisis at the border?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. It's preposterous, frankly, Chuck. I mean, that the first question that the President is going to have to answer, where is the emergency.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Oh, my god, a level of idiocy - it's dangerous. Let's hear now from the Customs and Border Patrol Commissioner instead.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KEVIN MCALEENAN, COMMISSIONER, U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PATROL: Two weeks ago I briefed the media and testified in Congress that our immigration system was at the breaking point. That breaking point has arrived this week at our border.

On Monday and Tuesday, CBP started the day with over 12,000 migrants in our custody. As of this morning, that number was 13,400. A high number for us is 4,000. A crisis level is 6,000 -

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Now, perhaps more troubling, for the first time in more than a decade, CBP is now forced to just release migrants into the U.S. because of overcrowding. Joining me now Tom Homan, Former Acting Director of ICE and current Fox News Contributor.

Tom, you and I've been hitting this issue for how long now? I mean, it's so upsetting on so many levels. It is a derogation of duty on the part of Congress. President is trying to raise the alarm here. But Congress refuses to change the law.

TOM HOMAN, CONTRIBUTOR AND FORMER ACTING ICE DIRECTOR: No, one may want to think clear - Border Patrol are releasing immigrants straight from the border.

But we got to remember something, the men and women of Border Patrol, they don't have to release these people. These people violating the laws of this country, entered the country illegally, which is a crime. They want to hold them to see a judge. But the Ninth Circuit tied their hands on that, the Democrats refusing to even accept this as a national crisis.

So the Border Patrol is in really tough spot. This is a morale killer, and the men and women down there doing the best job they can under a very difficult circumstance.

INGRAHAM: And they only have like 3,000 beds for my apparently family units. And I think they had took in 40,000 over the last - what was it just month, two months?

HOMAN: Yes. I read some news articles last week when I was in San Antonio. Some of the Democratic leadership was saying, the Trump ministration is making this crisis worse than it really is to try to raise awareness.

And I said, "All they got to do a simple math. 14,000 family units come in, there's 3,000 beds, do the math, so most of them are being released". And Democrats keep saying that the administration is nefarious, they are not they're not stepping up their efforts.

Well, they refuse to fund ICE number of beds. They also refused to give Border Patrol one position under the FY '18 or '19 budget. They've shutdown this administration every step of the way.

INGRAHAM: It's open borders, basically, that's what we have sadly. It is an open border situation. Jeh Johnson, Obama's Secretary of DHS said it's a crisis today.

HOMAN: --where did he see the crisis?

INGRAHAM: Is that the crime? I mean, this - anyone saying it's not a crisis, you're lying, just as you're lying about the Mueller report and everything else. You are lying to the American people if you're saying it's not a crisis. It's horrific.

So, well, what can be done? You mentioned that the President can order today, everybody who has an outstanding order of deportation find them, get them out of the country, that's one thing.

HOMAN: Well, President has to order that. I did when I was Director when I was--

INGRAHAM: OK. Director of ICE - no person currently --

HOMAN: I think that he need to go out there and execute the final orders. If he had due process, at great tax payers' expense, a federal judge ordered them remove. If those orders don't mean anything, they just go ahead open the border up. There's no integrity system. Remove them. I did it 3.5 years ago and it resulted in decreasing border crossings.

INGRAHAM: Tom Homan, we really appreciate your clarity on this for, as long as you've been on the show and you predicted this, sadly.

Hate crime hoaxer, Jussie Smollett boarded a plane from Chicago to LA, where he's going to be showered with praise at the NAACP Awards. This a bad look for the group. Donna Brazile, in LA for those Awards, she joins us next. And a big announcement ahead, you don't want to miss this one. Stay there.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARTIN PREIB, VP CHICAGO FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE: --imagine being a detective, in this case, you painstakingly investigated a hate crime. And now they're turning - they're ridiculing you. They're making a laughingstock out of the city's--

INGRAHAM: Oh, no.

PREIB: --out of the police officers.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: The Vice President of the Chicago Fraternal Order of Police sounding off they're on the decision this week by the Cook County State's Attorney's Office to unexpectedly drop all charges against Jussie Smollett in that head crime hoax.

But tonight, we've learned that Jussie may still get his day in court. Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel is demanding that the actor pay the city $130,000 to recoup the cost of that fraudulent investigation. And TMZ reporting that Smollett's team says they will not comply, setting up a showdown in civil court.

Joining me now is Fox32 Anchor and Reporter Rafer Weigel. Now he's been on this story from the very beginning. Rafer, from what you're hearing is there any chance that Chicago cops are the Mayor let this case go?

RAFER WEIGEL, FOX32 CHICAGO ANCHOR: Oh no, not, absolutely not. I mean, this is - right now you got a look at the theater that Rahm Emanuel is getting out of this. I mean I understand that he's upset with Kim Foxx, but there's a lot of people right now looking at Rahm with a bit of a side eye, because he's really raised his profile right now by beating the drum against Smollett.

There is a municipal code in the in the city's bylaws that states that you can sue for expenses into a police investigation and if they don't pay him the three of 130,000 - and that's just for the overtime - that's not for the cost of the investment - then they can sue them for three times that amount.

Rahm's getting a lot of political mileage out of this. But it is really fascinating, Laura, when you think about the fact that a case that became so politicized, so polarized both politically, racially, captured the attention of the entire world and somehow it got hijacked into a discussion about corruption - only in the City of Chicago would that happen.

INGRAHAM: Well, $130,000 is a lot of money to most people. It's a huge amount of money. But to a guy who makes an enormous amount of money in the entertainment industry, it's really to him not that much in the scheme of things. I'm kind of wondering why he wouldn't just write the check and say- -

WEIGEL: Because that would be an admission of guilt, and I think that right now it's just a lot of posturing and a lot of ego right now. Jussie Smollett feels that he won, and let's be honest, he did win. As the Fraternal Order or the gentleman who you had on earlier, I heard him speaking.

Kim Foxx did not just drop the charges, she essentially tried to make this case go away. She sealed the court order and the end the other day they tried to expunge the record and erase it completely. And the only reason that I'm told that that didn't happen is, because in order to do that, they would have to unseal the case record.

Meaning, reporters like myself, and our Freedom of Information Act request would then be granted and everybody would see the evidence that police had on Smollett, and they didn't want that. So that's why that's not happening.

INGRAHAM: Now, Rafer, I know there's a protest planned. The Police Union put out the posting, I think last night, and we put it up on our show - 11:00 a.m. on Monday against Kim Foxx for what they believe is the besmirching of the police in Chicago and just complete disrespect for the work they did, and the effort they put into this, the man-hours et cetera. What do you expect to happen there?

WEIGEL: I expect it to be a pretty big protest. I mean, the reason we're still talking about this, Laura, is because the fall out. I mean, you and I talked on Tuesday and what we saw on Tuesday was uncharted territory.

We'll now look at what happened this week with the National District Attorneys Association, The Illinois Prosecutors - the IPBA, also slamming Kim Foxx. I mean, I don't mean slamming - I mean, they sliced and diced and just really took her to task for what she did. This woman has ruined herself politically and professionally and is right now she is political kryptonite.

And now, right now, we're still trying to figure out why? We're still scratching our heads. I've talked to a couple of people who covered politics here, longtime journos and people inside City Hall, and right now the thinking is that Kim Foxx may have compromised herself in some way so badly that she had to make this case go away.

So whatever it is that she didn't want coming out, was probably - was actually worse than the outcome that happened to her now. And it's hard to imagine there being anything worse than that. That's why I don't think we've heard the last of this. This is an investigation into corruption or potential corruption, I should say.

INGRAHAM: It is. It seems like it's changing by the day, and Rafer thank you for your reporting on this. We'll check back with you next week for sure.

And at this hour Smollett is now hanging out in Hollywood ahead of tomorrow night's NAACP Image Awards where he's nominated for Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Drama. Well, not the drama we were just talking about, but Empire.

Project 21 is condemning this and demanding the NAACP drop the nomination. Co-Chair Horace Cooper went after the group on our show on Wednesday.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HORACE COOPER, PROJECT 21 CO-CHAIR: He's proving privilege isn't about your race, it's not about your gender. People who are elites like these Hollywood types, they're able to come in. There is a divide in America and it's between Main Street and these elites. It's about time that people recognize what's really going on, and it starts with the NAACP.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Joining me now is former DNC Chair and brand-new Fox News Contributor Donna Brazile. Donna it's great to have you on. Now, you're also in LA for the awards, so should Jussie still be nominated?

DONNA BRAZILE, FORMER DNC CHAIR: Hey, look - hey first of all, I got you this shirt Laura, so I hope to bring it back to you next week.

INGRAHAM: All right. You better give it to me girl.

BRAZILE: And by the way I'm paying for this with my - absolutely. Look, first of all, everybody's excited to be here at the NAACP Image Award. This is the 50th Anniversary. I'm excited to be here.

My colleagues and I, you've talked about our book before in the past, "For Colored Girls Who Have Considered Politics", we're up for two awards tonight.

INGRAHAM: OK. But Donna, I get that, and we are proud of you for that. But what about Jussie - that was a nice doge of Jussie. We're proud of you, but we're not proud of Jussie, so what the heck is going on with Jussie Smollett faking a crime and getting the big nomination, what's going on there?

BRAZILE: Well, he received the nomination before he faked his crime, I believe. But let me just say this. As you know, I've had so many emotions about this outrage at the fact that, perhaps he was a victim of a homophobic racist attack. Outrage, of course, that think Chicago Police--

INGRAHAM: --still think that.

BRAZILE: --I am - Laura, you've known me for a long time. I am so baffled, upset and baffled. I mean, I'm baffled, because I know Kim. She is someone who does her homework. She knows how to prosecute crimes. She has been --

INGRAHAM: This was a disaster.

BRAZILE: --deeply involved.

INGRAHAM: Well, Donna, we know a lot of people who make mistakes, right?

BRAZILE: This is a high - absolutely. This is a high profile mess.

INGRAHAM: Right, right.

BRAZILE: Everyone--

INGRAHAM: Right it was. But it's not enough to say - Donna - Donna, it's not enough to say - she's my friend, we've gone out to dinner. That's ridiculous, OK? We have a situation. If this were a white guy who said that two black guys approached him and screamed "cracker," and smashed him over the head and put something around his neck and poured something on him, the country would be -- there would be protests everywhere that this guy needs to get the book thrown at him, and I would be leading the protest, because anyone who fakes a hate crime does a real disservice to those that are truly the victims of hate crimes, let along what happens to the police and everybody. So if the shoe was on the other foot, they would be going crazy on all fronts. That's the deal.

BRAZILE: Because, as someone who understands the stain, the hatred, the vitriol that's out there, I get it. I expressed the same thing type of vitriol when I was on the Bill Maher show just a few weeks ago when this came up. This is a serious offense. And we still don't know a lot. We don't know anything about the two guys. Now, I was seeing this morning that they might have had on ski masks or white face. I have never even heard of that. So can we just try to figure --

INGRAHAM: Donna, Donna --

BRAZILE: This has been a tough week. Mercury is in retrograde. I hear you're about to see --

INGRAHAM: Donna, Donna, wait, wait. Are you saying --

BRAZILE: Michael Avenatti, the Mueller report, and now Jussie Smollett. I can't wait for week to be over.

INGRAHAM: I bet you can't. But Donna, are you actually telling me that you believe what Jussie's lawyer went on TV in front of the cameras, I don't what, she was on "The View" or something, she was on "The View." But she comes out and says, well, we saw a video once of them in white face, because there was a video online at one point of them in white face, which I've never seen. Then she just magically infers that they could have been in white face that night with no video evidence of that whatsoever. And if this is a big question mark, Jussie should say unseal the records. If he was saying unseal the records, I want to defend myself, that would be different.

BRAZILE: You know what, if he decides to come to the NAACP, and I don't know. I'm not buying his ride, OK. I don't know what his decision is all about. But if he decides to come and he goes on that red carpet, he better have something to say, because he is diverting attention away from all the great people who are up for awards, and he's also diverting attention from a mayoral race on Tuesday, and he's diverted attention from all of the kids and adults who have been murdered in Chicago, and we have not heard about that. So absolutely, this is one of those moments.

You remember, Laura, I know you and I are almost the same age. I think you are a few months younger.

INGRAHAM: I think a little bit more than that, but OK.

BRAZILE: Who is counting? Who is counting, OK?

(LAUGHTER)

BRAZILE: I'm going to try to look good on that red carpet.

INGRAHAM: Whatever.

BRAZILE: I am going to be a foxy woman. But 24 years ago, Laura, if you recall, O.J. got away with, quote-unquote, he got away from a jury trial. If this is due process, we need to hear about the process. I want to know more. I am baffled.

INGRAHAM: The mayor and the police chief don't think it is due process, nor do most police or prosecutors I have talked to across the country. But Donna, you have fun at the NAACP awards. I want a full report next week, and I want that t-shirt. I want it signed by Spike Lee. He knows me. His wife went to law school with me. Sign that for me by Spike. Tell him I said hi, OK.

BRAZILE: And by the way, they come in black and white. I bought you black, because I know you.

(LAUGHTER)

INGRAHAM: God bless you. We'll talk to you soon.

BRAZILE: God bless you too, boo.

INGRAHAM: All right, a really funny Friday Follies. Start placing your bets. We have some news on the royal baby name. Plus, is it time for women to lose the leggings? A college mom thinks so and things get ugly on campus. That and a lot more with Raymond Arroyo next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ANITA VOGEL, CORRESPONDENT: Live from America's News Headquarters, I'm Anita Vogel.

The Georgia House approving a restrictive heartbeat abortion ban on Friday. The measure passed by just two votes despite intense opposition from activists, physicians, and even Hollywood. The bill would ban abortion after a heartbeat is detected as early as six weeks, often before a woman knows she's pregnant. The ACLU has vowed to challenge the measure should Governor Brian Kemp sign it into law.

Vice President Joe Biden accused of inappropriate conduct by Lucy Flores, a former Democratic candidate for lieutenant governor of Nebraska. Flores says that in 2014 the vice president approached her from behind, put his hands on her shoulders, and gave her a slow, long kiss on the back of her head. A Biden spokesman says the former V.P. does not recall what she describes but supports her sharing her recollections of the events.

I'm Anita Vogel. Now, let's take you right back to "The Ingraham Angle."

INGRAHAM: It's Friday, and that means it is time for, oh, it's Friday Follies. Fighting for your right to wear leggings, our pick for the royal baby name, and a brand-new scandal, the world's tallest politician. Joining me now with all the details, Raymond Arroyo, Fox News contributor, "New York Times" bestselling author of the brand-new book, "Will Wilder, The Amulet of Power." All right, Raymond, what's the big fuss about girls wearing leggings and a mom upset at Notre Dame?

RAYMOND ARROYO, CONTRIBUTOR: At the University of Notre Dame. A mother of one of the students at Notre Dame wrote a letter to the editor of the university newspaper and in it, she suggested that young women should rethink wearing leggings, particularly at mass. She says leggings on women are an unforgiving garment, and asks "I wonder why no one thinks it's strange that the fashion industry has caused women to voluntarily expose their nether regions in this way."

Now, Laura, there was a fierce reaction on campus.

INGRAHAM: They were hating on her big time.

ARROYO: They said, wait, you are trying to tell us what we can and can't wear? No. She said, you have a choice and you should make the right choice and rethink this. Well, they had what they call a leggings pride day organized by a group that has no recognition by the university, and it exploded.

INGRAHAM: Isn't that special?

ARROYO: But my question is, most people don't look good in leggings. I don't care who you are.

INGRAHAM: It's a tough look to pull off.

ARROYO: And I will say that for men in biker shorts as well. Most people look like mashed potatoes shoved in a hefty bag, let's be honest.

INGRAHAM: Yes, well. Speak for yourself, Arroyo.

ARROYO: It's not an attractive look. And as the woman said, when you see every crevice and every shape --

INGRAHAM: Even men, by the way, Conan O'Brien found that out.

ARROYO: Yes, he did.

INGRAHAM: But I have to say, why isn't that mom able to express her truth? Everyone said this is my truth, this is my choice. OK. But it is a mother's right to say, you know something, I have two teenage sons. We don't need to be looking at your midriff and every crevice in your behind, as beautiful as you are.

ARROYO: If you have a long sweater or something, that's OK.

INGRAHAM: Long sweater, but if you are at the gym working out, that's fine. But since when does gym clothing --

ARROYO: Yoga pants have become a fashion choice.

INGRAHAM: Banish the term athleisurewear.

(LAUGHTER)

INGRAHAM: No. It's just sloppy.

ARROYO: I can top this. Just when you thought it was safe to go back to the mall, a fashion house called 41 Project has just unveiled what they call janties, jean panties, denim panties. In the French, they would call it day-long chafing, because why would you put that on? I don't know who would want to wear this?

INGRAHAM: But the description says you can wear it under or over pants.

ARROYO: I don't understand this at all.

INGRAHAM: Now, do you wear that over your leggings?

ARROYO: I wouldn't wear it at all. This is uncomfortable.

INGRAHAM: The best is when you get these brands. Lululemon charged them $100 for spandex. Wait a second.

ARROYO: In England, Laura, bookmakers are all aflutter over the name of the new royal baby, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's child. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The top of betting here is Diana at 10 to one, red hot favorite, no great surprises there. Then have a look at Arthur here. That is, without a doubt, the best batch of all the boy's names.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Arthur?

ARROYO: Now, Laura, Markle has said they plan on raising their child as gender neutral. So given that, we've come up with our own list of gender neutral royal names -- Pat, Avery, Dana, Drew, Lane, Lee, Alex, Andy, Carson, Charlie, or Rowan.

INGRAHAM: Since when is drew -- oh, Drew Barrymore.

ARROYO: Drew Barrymore. Drew, whoever, Pinsky.

INGRAHAM: But in these cases -- Drew Pinsky. I think actually you have to move beyond any name to just numbers now. A number or chair or --

ARROYO: You have a story that you found this week.

INGRAHAM: Speaking of gender neutrality, the first genderless voice premiered this week. It is attempting to replace those gender specific voices. They are very limiting for Siri and Alexa.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VOICE: Hi, I'm Q, the world's first genderless voice assistant. Think of me like Siri or Alexa but neither male nor female.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: We've got to play more of that. That's like a fried egg.

ARROYO: They claim voices like Siri or Alexa are reinforcing binary gender choices and this alternative would break that stereotype in A.I.

INGRAHAM: You know what that reminded me, it reminded me of the voice in that old Matthew Broderick movie "WarGames."

ARROYO: Nobody saw that movie.

INGRAHAM: Yes, they did. It was huge.

ARROYO: OK, we've got to go to this. Guinness Book of World Records named Robert Cornegy, a 6'10" Counselman from Brooklyn, as the world's tallest politician.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We are here to bring honor to someone who has brought politics to new heights.

(LAUGHTER)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The whole process took two years. And as a man over 50, I thought osteoporosis would set in and I would certainly lose the record.

(LAUGHTER)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ARROYO: A fight has already broken out, Laura, with other pols claiming they are actually taller than Cornegy and they deserve the title, people like North Dakota's insurance commissioner John Godfread. He's 6'11". Then there is the mayor of Warrensville Heights, Ohio, Brad Sellers. He claims to be seven feet. And an international contender, Yao Ming is a delegate to China's National People's Congress. He's 7'6". He may well be the tallest politician in the world, Laura.

INGRAHAM: I always think of coach seating for them, I always think of that.

ARROYO: Why are they fighting over this?

INGRAHAM: Because of course they do.

ARROYO: Have a great weekend.

INGRAHAM: We will send your family some of the janties.

ARROYO: Janties, I'll put them over my leggings. Thank you.

INGRAHAM: Yes, exactly. I'll pay for that photo.

Coming up, the worst media offenders of the week, "The Ingraham Angle" has got its eyes on you. The tape you don't want to miss, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: It's easy to become numb to media bias these days, so "The Ingraham Angle" is keeping track of the worst offenders each week. Joining me now are David Harsanyi, a senior editor at "The Federalist," and Brian Russell, TV host and media critic. Panel, let's begin with the obvious, the Trump-Russia collusion hoax. Not only did the big media fail completely this week, but some say it's as bad as it was with WMD and the Iraq reporting. Amazingly, the week began with the media defending themselves. Let's watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE SCARBOROUGH, MSNBC HOST: What would you have had media do over the past two years when Donald Trump lied throughout the 2016 campaign about his contacts with Russia?

BRIAN STELTER, CNN ANCHOR: That's what hundreds of journalists have been doing, trying to solve pieces of this Trump-Russia puzzle. Speculation actually has value too. It helps open our eyes, helps open our minds to what's possible.

CARL BERNSTEIN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: The media, the press has done one of the great reporting jobs in history.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: But by the end of the week, no doubt worn out from the well- deserved beating they received, they took to lashing out with cheap shots.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE SCARBOROUGH, MSNBC HOST: They don't know what point we started actually feeling sorry for him. He looked so sad and weak up there. He is swinging wildly.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He is just disgusting to look at. He is obese. I wish we could put that picture of him from behind playing tennis or playing golf. He is one of the repulsive physically looking human beings I have seen.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Well, David, the road to credibility isn't paved with insults, right? Yet here we are.

DAVID HARSANYI, SENIOR EDITOR, "THE FEDERALIST": Obviously those insults are a manifestation of frustration I think on their part, that they spent two years perpetuating this crazy story that didn't work out for them in any way, in any way.

INGRAHAM: But we are crazy now. Now the people who are actually pointing out, you were wrong. And you weren't just wrong. You accused the president, basically, of treason on a regular basis.

HARSANYI: It is not media bias. Media bias, we have. We know how to deal with that. This is something far beyond that. They tried to overturn an election, helping the Democratic Party overturn an election.

INGRAHAM: Brian, over at CNN, they were doing the best that they could, I guess, to say we were doing yeoman's work, and speculation is part of journalism, or whatever it was that Stelter said. Again, if the shoe were on the other foot and Obama had been accused of treason, literally treason, wow. I can't imagine what the response of the media would have been if it was conservative media doing that.

BRIAN RUSSELL, TV PERSONALITY AND MEDIA CRITIC: Yes, speculation has value. I'll engage in some speculation. I speculate that those guys are colluding with Democrats to manipulate the outcome of the 2020 election. How is that for value in speculation?

And what about this fat-shaming of the president? I thought fat-shaming was a big no-no on the left. And if that's all they have got left, then I would say the fat lady has sung on this whole Trump-Russia bogus scandal. The opera is over. The good guy won. And these guys ought to be shamed for fat-shaming.

INGRAHAM: They have no shame. Let's move on from the fat-shaming to physical threats against the president.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If the bully gets close, I'll punch the bully in the mouth.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Just like that?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Just like that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Let's take a look at Jim Acosta's face there. This is the face of a reporter for CNN smirking when the governor of Puerto Rico said he wanted to punch Trump in the face. Brian, what do you think about that smug look? Not that we really thought Acosta was objective.

RUSSELL: Whether it's Joe Biden saying that he wishes he could have taken the president out behind the school house and beaten him up in high school, or this guy saying he wants to punch the president in his mouth, every time I hear one of these guys, I ask myself, who is hearing this thinking, that's my team. That's the team I want to root for. Now, I know at least one person, Jim Acosta, the objective journalist, Jim Acosta. He probably has bobbleheads of these guys in his office.

INGRAHAM: David, they do seem to be grasping for a new Russian collusion, something. OK, it has got to be the inauguration or it's Puerto Rico. And it's like throwing spaghetti against the wall. It always slides down.

HARSANYI: First thing, if anyone had said that about Hillary Clinton or Obama, we would have a national discussion about violence. But secondly, yes, you're right. That's why they are clamoring to see the report. They can't wait to latch on to so redacted part or some sentence to pretend that they were right the whole time. You can't spend two years doing this and simply say, oh, we were wrong and move on. Its' obvious they are all in, and there is no way out.

INGRAHAM: Finally, the MSNBC spin on the Smollett shocker this week.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MIDWIN CHARLES: Here, you have a police department that is known for lying and covering up, and yet they were outraged at the fact that Jussie Smollett may have lied and may have covered something up. So the irony was there.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Brian, so it's the police department who did all this investigation for like 1,000 lowers. I guess it's their fault here.

RUSSELL: As the son of the cop that I am, my dad was a career law enforcement officer, this just makes me angry for all the good cops that are out on the streets of Chicago tonight, which is almost all of them, to take the narcissistic, self-entitled, sociopathic waste of cops' time and the taxpayers' money that Smollett pulled and try to turn it into an indictment of the cops just shows how anti-cop MSNBC's legal analyst really is.

INGRAHAM: And David, by the way, Stelter basically doubled down on that idea, saying we don't really know what happened. Real quick.

HARSANYI: This is the same thing with Trump and Russia, it's that there's a media that wants to believe things and does. They don't show enough skepticism at the very least, even if you give them the benefit of the doubt.

INGRAHAM: David, Brian, thank you so much. Great to see you today.

And coming up, I have an exciting announcement for you. You don't want to miss this. Stay right there.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: And tonight, we end with a big announcement. This weekend, my team and I are going to be traveling to the Texas-Mexico border for Monday night's show. Because of security concerns, we can't tell you exactly where we are going to be, but I can tell you that we will be bringing you behind-the-scenes footage of what the day-to-day operations are like for the Border Patrol agents who are dealing with this emergency overload at our Southern border. From border crossing interrogations to stash house rates, we are going to bring you the unedited reality of a crisis in action. And we'll also speak to the folks in the community who are facing this head-on, while journalists in New York and politicians in D.C. tell them to accept this as the new normal. You are not going to want to miss Monday's show.

That's all the time we have tonight. Don't forget, check out my latest podcast. You don't want to miss it, why sovereignty matters, why nations still matter, all on the Laura Ingraham Podcast. Just go to PodcastOne or iTunes.

Shannon Bream and the "Fox News @ Night" team take it from here. Have a good weekend.

Content and Programming Copyright 2019 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2019 ASC Services II Media, LLC. 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 ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.