'The Ingraham Angle' on humanitarian crisis in Ukraine

close

Video

'Ingraham Angle' takes you inside Kyiv bomb shelter

Ukrainian mother tells Laura Ingraham if she didn’t have a baby in her arms, she'd be out there fighting.

This is a rush transcript from "The Ingraham Angle," March 3, 2022. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

LAURA INGRAHAM, FOX NEWS HOST: Welcome to THE INGRAHAM ANGLE. I'm Laura Ingraham, Ukrainians are waking up to the ninth day of Russia's ongoing invasion. Now one major city has already fallen to Russian forces. And right now, Europe's largest nuclear power plant located in Southeastern Ukraine is on fire after reportedly being struck by Russian artillery.

Now the plant has six nuclear reactors, but sources are telling Fox tonight that there's no sign of elevated radiation levels at this point that is surrounding the site. Now the strike does lay bare, however, the current stakes. While the White House says there are no plans for President Biden to speak with Vladimir Putin in the near future. The Russian President phoned his French counterpart earlier today, and Emmanuel Macron's takeaway, Russian forces won't stop until the entire country of Ukraine is conquered. And he warns that the worst is yet to come.

Are we starting now to get some sense of what that might look like? As Russia makes gains in the south of Ukraine, including an attempt to suffocate the port city of Mariupol. They've also started raising towns on the outskirts of Ukraine's capital. The shelling reducing many buildings, including residential ones to rubble.

Now, we start in Kyiv, where Fox's Trey Yingst is standing-by Trey, this has been very hard to watch today, the refugee situation unfolding, the civilian casualties mounting. How dangerous right now are people, are they worried, obviously about this attack on the power plant, given the stakes there?

TREY YINGST, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Laura, it's extremely dangerous right now. Tonight, there was a battle at a nuclear power plant in the southern part of Ukraine. Just north of that area, you talked about that Russian forces now control this plant has six reactors. And while three of them were off the grid today, three of them were on the grid and they were connected to power. So, it's significant because although there was no fire, we now have learned at the actual reactor, the fact there was a gun battle and shelling at a nuclear facility, the largest nuclear power plant in Europe that supplies 25 percent of power to Ukraine is significant.

And it really just shows how much the collateral damage can affect a civilian population. It has the chance to unravel into something so dangerous for the people here in Ukraine. And it comes as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy today is calling for talks with Russian President Putin.

Today, we were part of a small group of journalists invited to meet with the president here in the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv. He talked about a variety of issues, including the desire to implement a no fly zone over his country, and also the need for more weapons. I asked him about his conversation on Tuesday with U.S. President Biden, he had this to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

YINGST: You spoke this week with President Biden, how would you describe your conversations with the U.S. leader? And do you believe the Americans waited too long to give Ukraine the support you need to push back this Russian offensive?

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT: We have good contacts, I can tell the truth. And it's a pity that it began after beginning of this war, but we have it and my appreciation to him and to his team.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

YINGST: I want you to take a look at some of this drone video from just west of the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv. We're talking just miles away from where we're standing right now hit by Russian shells today, missile attacks still throughout this country, the Russian forces are continuing their invasion and you can see the destruction and damage to civilian areas. The Russians say they are not targeting civilian areas. But these images tell a different story.

Now throughout the capital of Kyiv, there are roadblocks set up every single block. Forces are in the streets even tonight tried to do everything they can to slow what is expected to be a bloody urban offensive by Russian forces in the coming days. Laura.

INGRAHAM: Trey, given this situation at the power plant and also the shelling that you're hearing on the outskirts of Kyiv, any sense of the timing of when the Russian forces will be making their way into the city proper.

YINGST: So, we know about that Russian convoy just northwest of the city. It's currently situated about 15 miles outside of town. But the concern according to U.S. officials is that, it would be used to ultimate encircle this city. Now, when they do that, it's a city of nearly 3 million people so they can't immediately move in because they are going to face some fierce resistance, not only from soldiers here, but also civilians who have taken up arms.

But it's significant, because when you talk about what that's going to look like, we're talking about days away, really, within the next week is the expected timeline for all of this to happen. Now, today at that meeting in Kyiv, we asked the president, whether or not he felt Ukrainian forces could ultimately push back this Russian offensive, how much more time could they hold out? And he simply said he doesn't know because there is a real understanding despite the support from the international community, if we see such a heavy bombardment from Russian forces, not only from the air, but also these artillery units on the ground, it could be extremely difficult to hold this city, Laura.

INGRAHAM: Trey, there are things like food, fuel, artillery, you need it all. And you need a lot of it. And it is, it is - this is very, very tough to watch. Trey, thank you. Stay safe.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OLENA GNES, UKRAINIAN MOM IN KYIV BOMB SHELTER: I hope to see you again,. soon. I hope that all of us will stay alive. I really hope that my husband comes back home.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: The woman you just saw was Ukrainian YouTuber Olena Gnes, And like many people in Kyiv, she hunkers down in a bomb shelter when the city's strict curfew goes into effect. Now Olena joins me now live from that bomb shelter. Olena, we just heard you talk about your husband. And I know he's out there. And I know he's prepared to fight. When was the last time you talked with them?

GNES: In the evening, right now, it's like early morning. And we've talked before the night. Yes. And he said that he will be fighting.

INGRAHAM: Olena, you're clutching your baby in your arms. And I know there's so many children, especially in the underground in the metro area that has been used as an extensive bomb shelter for tens of thousands of Ukrainians. Basic questions about food and milk and supplies, medicines. Do you have those basic necessities tonight as you don't know how long this is going to go on?

GNES: Well, for today, for tomorrow, we have enough. We have enough, maybe even for like a week, we have enough. But I don't think we have them more.

INGRAHAM: Those Ukrainians tonight, those Ukrainians tonight, Olena who have not had the chance to reach their loved ones, their brothers or their uncles, their husbands. That is - I mean, that's unspeakably difficult, not knowing what happens next. How hard has that been for your friends and others who've perhaps lost touch with those who've remained to fight?

GNES: Guys, I think we know what's going to happen next. And somebody already told on TV right now to us, that they're going to make a steel ring and just arrange a massacre here. So, I think we know what's going to happen. We know that we have enough food just for one week. I know that we do not. We have like the water enough for one week. And that if that's going to happen, we know that Putin will not conquer Ukraine, but if he conquers Ukraine, he will not be able to hold it. And this is why he is going just to kill the most of the population who is left, who didn't run away. And this is how he is going to hold Ukraine. So, he is going to make here genocide, massacre. So, we know what's going to happen.

INGRAHAM: Olena, did you try to leave Ukraine or did you make a decision that you were not going to?

GNES: I had enough of fuel. We had the car with fuel and everything, but we decided to stay. Because if we run away from our home, you will not come instead of us and protect our home right? So, first of all, our responsibility to protect our home. Now if I left and left all these people behind me here in the city, all this women, children and men, because for me the life of men and women, it's equally important.

I feel pity for everyone for both women and men. If I left all of them here and did not everything possible to save them, I just wouldn't be able to live with it, anywhere in the U.S., in France, it's good to travel for vacations, but just run away and know that you left behind your people to die, I wouldn't just survive with it. And I don't want my children to live with it. I just stay, and I do whatever it takes, I still hope, I still hope that we will be saved that we will win. And but for this, we need - we need help, we really need urgent help. No fly zone, immediate intervention, something like this.

And if you guys are afraid to make Putin angry and provoke him, you see Ukrainians were not provoking anyone, he just attacked.

INGRAHAM: Do you think - Olena, do you think this situation was needlessly provoked that Putin was provoked by desire for NATO expansion or some type of failed leadership along the line?

GNES: No, this is what I'm saying, we were not provoking Putin, it was not provoked. It was just - he just doesn't want Ukraine to be an independent country. He just doesn't believe Ukrainian nation exists. And he clearly said, I mean, if we say, OK, we're not Ukrainians, we will be Russians. Only in this case, he is not provoked. I mean, it's not in conversation. It's not in negotiation. It's just, I want you to obey, I want you to be under my control, and if you are not under my control, I will kill you. This is the conversation, so what should we do?

INGRAHAM: Olena, we're all praying for you. And we're praying for the Ukrainian people and your children and all the children of Ukraine.

GNES: Thank you, guys. I'm afraid prayers are not enough. But thank you.

INGRAHAM: Well, you need supplies, and you need ammunition. Olena, thank you. We're going to have more breaking news from the war in Ukraine--

GNES: If I have ammunition, I'd take a gun instead of a baby and go, and kill them. Yes. But it would be great to have some no fly zone, not only gun in my hand, because I'm holding a baby right now. Thank you.

INGRAHAM: Olena, thank you. Now, we're going to take a look now at what our own leaders are up to. Because there's a lot happening on the home front that is affecting what's happening overseas. And so, we're going to get to all of that. That means the angle. Pretend warriors, that is the focus of tonight's angle.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN (D), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Tonight, I say to the Russian oligarchs, and the corrupt leaders who built billions of dollars off this violent regime. No more.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We will leave no stone unturned in our efforts to investigate, arrest and prosecute those whose criminal acts enable the Russian government to continue its unjust war.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You're going to see IRS agents, Department of Homeland Security, FBI, the Marshal Service, all pooling our efforts to run this task force.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: As you see things quickly spiral in Ukraine, the Biden administration wants you to believe that they're engaged and taking strong actions to pressure Putin by creating a DOJ task force with a really cool name. By the way, it's complete with sophisticated asset tracking, and lots of sexy video.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Welcome to televisions unchallenged authority on wealth, prestige and success. It's another dazzling lifestyles of the rich and famous.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The four biggest yachts in the Maldives right now reportedly are Russian owned.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: In France, authorities have seized a yacht owned by Igor Sechin.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They've actually seized two Russian yachts that includes Amore Vero, which is owned by Igor Sechin, who is the CEO of Rosneft and also seized by Germany as an yacht owned by Alisher Usmanov.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Now of course, these moves are about as effective as cloth masks on a cross country flight. Now, we just got finished with COVID response theater. And now they're starting up with Ukraine response theater. Now these are all choreographed moves to make it appear as though the government is working hard to keep you safe and the people of Ukraine safe, but it's all a ruse for masking a hidden agenda.

Now, a few points to keep in mind. First, the freezing of assets is nothing new. The Department of Justice has always had the power to deny international criminals and fraudsters access to their own wealth including any ill begotten gains. When not abused by out of control prosecutors, asset forfeiture laws are powerful tools against crime and corruption.

But as we side with Ukrainian people against Russia's barbaric, hideous invasion, shouldn't we expect our own government to act under established and fair legal criteria?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: How is White House choosing which oligarchs to sanction? Do you start with the richest ones or the ones with the closest ties to Vladimir Putin?

JEN PSAKI, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: We look at one of the big factors is, of course, the proximity to President Putin. We want him to feel the squeeze, we want the people around him to feel the squeeze. I would - I don't believe this is going to be the last set of oligarchs, making them a priority and a focus of our individual sanctions is something the president has been focused on.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Now, is the governing legal standard now, the feel of the squeeze standard? I must have missed that one in law school, but perhaps their new Supreme Court nominee can explain to me how such an arbitrary and vague classification is actually constitutional. Asset freezing requires credible allegations of criminal action or civil fraud, maybe that's here, maybe it's not. It also means that you have to find the assets, which are often hidden in shell corporations, partnerships, or things like LLCs.

Now, what does this require? Well, this requires time, manpower, forensic work, and significant resources.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Earlier that you want to feel the squeeze, and the people around him to feel the squeeze. How does the administration feel that these sanctions could actually change his behavior?

PSAKI: What we're talking about here is seizing their assets, seizing their yachts and making it harder for them to send their children to colleges and universities in the West. These are significant steps that will impact the people who are closely around President Putin.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: OK, these significant steps also take international cooperation and time. And we know time is not on the Ukrainian side, you just heard Olena speak out. Even if we could expeditiously freeze every oligarchs, luxury assets, would that really stop the suffering of the Ukrainian people that's happening right now? Do we think Putin is going to wake up and say, next week and he's going to get up there and he's going to say, you know that chalet (ph) and (inaudible) was so important to me? I think I'll call Zelenskyy and send the troops home. No, more importantly, we have to ask, is there a possibility that this could all backfire, and make things even worse for Ukraine?

Is anyone in the Biden administration even gaming any of this out, you wonder. So, let's be real as satisfying as it may be to see these 400 foot luxury liners padlocked, chasing down oligarchs is like swatting away mosquitoes when a cobra is about to strike your leg. As the angle has been telling you, this has been from day one, the biggest threat facing free people everywhere is China.

Russia would not be able to do what it's doing now without China providing a financial cushion, buying its energy, buying its wheat, and so on. China's decision yesterday to abstain from a UN measure demanding the immediate withdrawal of Russian forces from Ukraine, that sent a clear message that President Xi is fine with Putin's campaign of terror. This begs the question, if they really want to get Putin's funding source, why is Biden not clamping down on Chinese Corporation and Xi's inner circle about 340,000 Chinese students studying in the United States right now, by the way.

Biden's team brags about plans to put the squeeze on Putin and his pals, as the Biden administration gives hugs to Xi and his. Remember, they're going to help us on climate change, though. Isn't that John Kerry's point? So, we can't get them upset at us? Yes, right. Well, the fact is, without Xi support and tacit approval, Putin couldn't have pulled this off.

In the years leading up to this moment, NATO missed an opportunity. And so, did the U.S., maybe could have avoided this nightmare unfolding before our eyes. And we gave up our energy independence and oil and gas and then Biden and Germany and powered Russia with Nord Stream 2. Meanwhile, the globalist propped up China by letting him into the WTO and offshoring our manufacturing millions and millions of American jobs. And we also failed to strike a deal with Russia over NATO expansion. Maybe that was possible. We'll never know.

And speaking of trade, right now, even with this humanitarian catastrophe that we've been and documenting on Fox News all day long for several days now aided and abetted by China, both Russia and China tonight still enjoy the same trading privileges with us, as the UK.

Even Canada has the good sense to revoke Russia's most favored nation status. They did that today. My question is, what are we waiting for? I can tell you who's not waiting, China. They formed an alliance of convenience with Russia, and we let it happen. But at least we might get some cool yachts out of it. And that's the angle.

Joining me now is Chris Swecker, former FBI Assistant Director. Chris, what did I get wrong on this issue of the oligarchs and their assets and the big new task force and all the showboating about how they were going to get the boats?

CHRIS SWECKER, FORMER FBI ASSISTANT DIRECTOR: Yes, Laura, someone who ran all or oversaw all of the FBI's criminal investigations, including Russian organized crime and Kleptocracy, I'm afraid that this big announcement is what they call in Texas, all hat and no cattle. I believe they're over promising something that they can't deliver, without the due process that you're talking about. I mean, these oligarchs are unquestionably part of Putin's power base. They are cronies, they skim, they bust out, they buy companies and bust out and they do all kinds of things that generate illicit proceeds, which they park in the United States in real estate, in New York, in Miami and Los Angeles and Cleveland, in North Carolina, where I am.

But they've been doing it for decades. And my question is, what took you so long? Why haven't we been going after them before now, and really all things Russian, because there is nothing that Vladimir Putin's government is doing that isn't to the detriment of the United States. And these oligarchs are just a way to project that here.

INGRAHAM: The point that I was trying to make, Chris is that, look, these people are suffering terribly now, whether we can do much about it, given what's unfolding right now. I don't know. I'll leave that to others to say, but the idea that seizing some yachts in the Mediterranean or a few condos in New York, I find that insulting.

OK, you can do that anyway, if it's fraud, or criminal activity, or the ill begotten gains from some enterprise, that's already on the table, they could already do that. So, it's kind of a fraud that the government is perpetrating on the people to make it look like they're doing something, anything to kind of even out the situation. That's my problem with it. It's just phony.

SWECKER: Yes, it clearly it's not. I agree, it's not going to have any immediate effect. But again, I come at it from a law enforcement perspective. We've known about these oligarchs for years; we've known that they've been part of that power base. And my concern, and my commentary is, why haven't we done it before now? And yes, it's not going to have any immediate effect. So, really does it, does it - the big announcement, overpromising and under delivering is almost guaranteed.

INGRAHAM: And don't you think they've already moved off a lot of their assets? I mean, they knew this was coming.

SWECKER: Well, they've been warned.

INGRAHAM: They're not billionaires, because they're complete idiots. Right? I mean, they probably have moved quite a few of their assets into other corporations, et cetera.

SWECKER: Yes, they're in the names of corporations from Nevis, and St. Kitts and Panama and the Isle of Man, Cyprus, their daughters, their sons, their cousins, their violinist, and Putin's case who holds 2 billion of his dollars. So yes, we just given them warning. And they can just layer some more, they can just burrow in even deeper. That's another one of my concerns. Why announce you're going to do this, just do it.

INGRAHAM: Yes, Chris, thank you, with your experience in this, invaluable. Now for one brief glimmering moment today, Nancy Pelosi seemed to see the light.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): I'm all for that ban.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Ban the oil ban.

PELOSI: Ban the oil that will come from Russia.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: But hold your applause because with Old Nan, there's always a catch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PELOSI: President has already talked about releasing oil from the - as he already has done up from the sprawl and but I'm not for drilling on public lands.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: OK, she just had a Joe Biden moment, did she not know it was a strategic reserves? Wow. Well, that's right. She wants to ban Russian and American oil. Both. Democrats are so committed to the Greeniac cause, they would rather send cash to despotic anti-American regimes, then drill another well here. OK, you think I'm exaggerating? Here's Mayor Pete today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Could the president possibly consider authorizing the Keystone pipeline, working something out with Iran.

PETE BUTTIGIEG, SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION: I mean look the president has said that all options are on the table.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Joining me now Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton, he sits on the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Intel Committee. Senator, so we're getting oil from despotic regimes. We've basically neutered ourselves and new energy production and refining. But apparently we're supposed to get up and clap because Mayor Pete wants us all on bicycles.

SEN. TOM COTTON (R-AR): Yes, Laura, the Democrats are blind ideologues when it comes to oil and gas. I'm glad that Nancy Pelosi has finally come around to what I've been saying for weeks with so many Republicans say that we should ban the import of Russian oil and gas, we should not be sending tens of millions of dollars to Vladimir Putin's war machine. Yet she wouldn't replace it with American oil and gas, which would of course, just mean higher prices at the pump for Americans. Or you have Pete Buttigieg's proposal, which is to ban Russian oil and gas and replace it with Iranian oil and gas, so send billions of dollars to the ayatollahs who chant Death to America. That's just how ideologically opposed they are to American energy.

And it also raises another point, Laura, at a time when we're isolating Vladimir Putin in every way, Joe Biden is personally relying on Vladimir Putin to negotiate a bad nuclear deal with the Iranians.

INGRAHAM: And Russia, is brokering it, correct?

COTTON: Absolutely. They're sitting down at the negotiating table. Vladimir Putin is essentially acting as the lawyer and the banker for the ayatollahs chanting Death to America. And Joe Biden is hoping that he can get a bad nuclear deal to get more Iranian oil to replace all the American oil that he won't produce. It would be very simple to do what I proposed yesterday in the Senate, which is just to start producing more oil and gas again here in America.

You heard at the State of the Union the other night, a lot of talk about make it in America, well, we can make our own oil and gas in America, Joe Biden just refuses to.

INGRAHAM: I hope people understand what's happening. We're about to buy oil from Iran. We buy it from Russia. But now Congress is going to vote on billions and billions and billions of more in the way of aid and so forth, for Ukraine, when we're sending billions of dollars to Russia and to Iran, both enemies of the United States, or adversaries, enemies, whatever you want to call it tonight. This is literally the definition of insanity. I mean. Senator.

COTTON: It is dangerous. It's dangerous. And it's naive. We're sending all this money to Russia, at the same time law that we just learned today from the Democratic Chairman, the Armed Services Committee, we're not sending real time targeting intelligence to Ukraine that we have available that they could use to target Russians who have invaded their country because Joe Biden is afraid it would be provocative or escalatory. It's just another example along with his failed energy policy of the half measures that have brought us to the point of this barbaric invasion in Ukraine.

INGRAHAM: Senator CIA director, former, thank goodness, John Brennan, made an earlier comment earlier today that was stunning.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN BRENNAN, FORMER CIA DIRECTOR: This is only going to lead to I think Putin's unraveling in terms of his position in Russian government. Now, what's going to be the tripwire in terms of pressure on oligarchs and pressure on the Russian people and commodities and other types of things? It's unclear, but I do believe that Putin's days are numbered. Maybe be in the double-digits.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Senator, is there any intel that you know of that Putin's days are numbered? I know Lindsey Graham, earlier tonight tweeted that basically, someone needs to take him out. Or maybe I'm paraphrasing, but he's basically someone should assassinate Putin. I don't know why a sitting U.S. senator would be tweeting that out. It seems really dangerous and stupid to say that, and we like Lindsey Graham, but that's a stupid comment. But Brennan says his days are numbered.

COTTON: I'm not aware Laura of information that would support that. Vladimir Putin has ruled Russia with an iron fist for 20 years. All of those oligarchies are beholden to Vladimir Putin. And for that matter, they probably hold the same barbaric, ruthless views that he does as well. They all came up together in the KGB in the late Soviet era. So, I'm not aware of any such information.

I mean, obviously, throughout Russian history, things often seem impossible until they quickly become inevitable. But I think it's a kind of wish casting by Democrats who think that something like this may just suddenly happen and absolve Joe Biden from the stakes over the past year that signaled weakness to Vladimir Putin and embolden his long-standing imperial ambitions in Ukraine.

INGRAHAM: Senator, do you think your colleagues should have been tweeting out that Putin should essentially be assassinated by someone, you think that's helpful?

COTTON: I think what we should all be focused on is trying to get Russian troops out of Ukraine and to save as many Ukrainian lives as possible, so they can live in their own nation and make their own decisions for themselves, not have it imposed on them by Vladimir Putin. That's where the focus should be.

INGRAHAM: And we hope not start a nuclear war in the process. But Senator, we really appreciate your voice tonight, thank you.

And let's bring in Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House, FOX News contributor. Newt, so the showboating on the oligarchs, which is going to make zero difference with Putin. Meanwhile, the Russians and the Chinese are pulling in tens of billions of dollars every month because they have the same trade status, most favored nation status, as the U.K. has with us. So if we really want to have an effect, isn't this the best course is to remove MFN from Russia and probably the other countries helping them like China, rather than putting padlocks on yachts?

NEWT GINGRICH, FORMER SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: That would be a step. But the fact is, after watching the disaster in Afghanistan, I wasn't convinced that it was possible for the American government to be even dumber, more destructive, and more dishonest. This is now worse than Afghanistan.

If you want to help people of Ukraine, get them weapons. Get them weapons tonight. Get them weapons through the CIA. Get them weapons through covert means. Get them weapons by contracting with private contractors. But what the Biden administration is doing is an absurdity. If they were going out of their way to weaken the United States, they could hardly do a better job. Punish the American oil and gas industry, try to buy oil and gas from Russia and Iran, our mortal enemies at the present time, and at the same time, ask the Russians to take the lead in Vienna in cutting a deal with the Iranians.

If you were Putin and you are sitting there watching all this, and you know the Americans are trying -- the American government wants to buy your oil, and you know that the $1 billion a day you're making out of oil finances your entire worse, so who cares about sanctions, this whole thing is an absurdity. It is dishonest. It is intellectually corrupt. And frankly, it's embarrassing to have the Defense Department that is incapable of getting aid to the people of Ukraine.

With reasonable amounts of the equipment, and with things like targeting information, the Ukrainians could dramatically raise the cost on the Russians. And you're going to have to do that because, I will tell you flatly, the Russian doctrine is to win. They are going to escalate as much as they have to. They are going to do whatever they have to. If that means taking out a nuclear reactor, they're going to take it out. If that means using barbaric weapons against innocent civilians, they're going to use barbaric weapons. Just look at Chechnya and look at what Putin did there. Why would we think he's going to back off unless he loses?

INGRAHAM: But Newt, Newt, Newt. I don't think he's going to back off, but the question is, given the situation as it exists right now, what can the United States do with everything else that may come? Everyone wants the Ukrainian people to survive and thrive and be free. But we also do have one of the most powerful nuclear arsenals on the other side of this. And if Putin is as nutty as all these senators are claiming, then that's a gamble. We have to all admit what this is. It is a gamble if we decide to go in there big and heavy militarily. Targeting people, targeting information is different.

GINGRICH: Look, I don't think we should -- I agree with what Lindsey Graham said earlier tonight. I don't think a single American soldier or sailor or airman should go into Ukraine. But we have lots of sophisticated equipment we could get them tonight. We have a lot of capabilities in terms of intelligence assets. We can start giving them tonight. There are a lot of things we could do to help them win tonight. None of this nonsense about six months from now or a year from now or five years from now.

And my point is the Russians deliberately sustain tactical nuclear capability that we gave up deliberately. We have a doctrine that says you never go nuclear unless it's literally in defense of the homeland. They have a doctrine that says you use whatever system works. And there is no threshold of Russian doctrine.

And I think the bigger point is there going to use whatever level of power they have to use, and they are going to kill whoever they have to kill to win. That's the point of Putin talking to Macron today. He ain't backing off. So we are either going to defeat him, or he's going to win. And I think we need to understand that.

And frankly, he doesn't care about yachts. When he gets done, he'll take that $1 billion a day that we are sending him and he can buy yachts for all of his oligarch friends, and he doesn't care. And we don't understand the Russian doctrine, we don't understand the Russian mentality. And it's a much tougher system than we are.

INGRAHAM: You bet. Newt, thank you for your expertise tonight, as always. Great to see you.

Now, it's getting close to daylight, and in the city of Lviv, Ukraine, that's where FOX's Lucas Tomlinson is standing by with the latest on the situation at the nuclear power plant. Lucas?

LUCAS TOMLINSON, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Laura, we just learned that there has been no change in the radiation levels from officials at the nuclear power plant in southern Ukraine. And none of the equipment, including the six reactors, have been affected by the damage. What is concerning is there were ongoing hostilities earlier tonight between Russian and Ukrainian forces, small arms fire and even some tank rounds. But we know now none of the six reactors have been affected.

This nuclear power plant, Laura, is not just the largest in Ukraine. It's the largest in Europe, it's one of the top ten largest in the world and supplies about a quarter of the energy to the Ukrainian people. There was a fire that broke out earlier at this nuclear power plant, but again, not at the reactor. It was at an administration away from the reactors. And of course, these reactors are very robust. But the situation was serious enough that President Biden called Ukrainian President Zelenskyy to discuss it, and Biden's energy secretary says those reactors are now being shut down, quote, safely. Laura?

INGRAHAM: Lucas, thank you.

And Kentucky Congressman Thomas Massie is one of the three Republicans who have been harangued for opposing a House resolution supporting the Ukraine. How could he do such a thing? Of course, it turns out the Congressman's reasons for voting against this bill were not only valid but left us asking why more Republicans didn't oppose it. Congressman Massie joins us now. Congressman, explain how this unfolded and so we understand exactly what this resolution said.

REP. THOMAS MASSIE, (R-KY): Absolutely. Thank you, Laura. And I want to give my colleagues Matt Rosendale and Paul Gosar a chance to be harangued as well, because they were the only who joined me in voting this way.

We fully support the people of Ukraine for their right to self- determination. And that was basically the title of this resolution. But this resolution ended up to be seven pages. And I think it runs the risk of escalating the conflict in Ukraine and drawing the United States into it.

For instance, it guarantees that we will have defensive security assistance to the Ukrainians. What does that term mean? It's so broad that it could mean boots on the ground, or what some of my colleagues in the House and the Senate have already called for, a no-fly zone. Can you imagine that? The U.S. would be engaging Russian MiGs and shooting them down to impose a no-fly zone? We shouldn't be playing chicken with a nuclear power, and we certainly shouldn't be shooting down jets that they have.

It also expands the U.S. a commitment to Belarus. It condemns the leader Belarus and implies that we should overthrow him. Can we get through the situation in Ukraine before we expand the conflict to Belarus? I would hope so.

And then finally, it calls for crippling sanctions on Russia. Look, the sections we have now, I agree with your previous guests on this, they are really not going to affect Russia that much. But if we have crippling sanctions on Russia, number one, you run the risk of alienating those protesters who are pushing against Putin if we end up starving them out. And number two, you think inflation is bad now hurting the poor in the United States, wait till you see what happens when we no longer bring in fertilizer and fuel.

INGRAHAM: I might part ways with you on the most favored nation status question, but the other points I think I would agree. Reagan didn't trade with Russia. I lived in the Soviet Union as a student. We couldn't get any American goods. They were hungry for them, OK. China gets all the benefits of America's trade to undermine us 24/7 and do everything that China does to support Russia. So -- so I don't know about that. I think, yes, everything is a risk in the game of life, I guess.

But I want to read something that Lindsey Graham tweeted earlier today that I mentioned briefly to Newt Gingrich. "Is there a Brutus in Russia? Is there a more successful Colonel Stauffenberg in the Russian military? The only way this ends is for somebody in Russia to take this guy out. You would be doing your country and the world a great service." He sent that out a short while ago. Your reaction to that tonight?

MASSIE: I think it's insane. Did he suggest that it should be a secret plot and tweet that as well? Our goal here should be to de-escalate the conflict between Russia and the United States here and resolve what's going on in Ukraine, hopefully to the benefit of Ukraine people as soon as possible without dragging American troops into this or without wasting our dollars over there.

INGRAHAM: Congressman Massie, it's an important conversation to have, and we appreciate the fact that you joined us tonight.

What if our own foreign policy establishment and not Vladimir Putin is partly responsible for what's happening in Ukraine right now? That's what the University of Chicago political scientist John Mearsheimer thinks, and for years he warned that peeling Ukraine away from Russia with promises of NATO and E.U. membership would end in disaster. He reiterated that view in a recent "New Yorker" interview, saying "If Russia thinks that Ukraine presents an existential threat to Russia because it is aligning with the United States and its western European allies, this is going to cause an enormous amount of damage to Ukraine. That of course is exactly what's happening. The strategically wise strategy for Ukraine is to break off its close relations with the rest. If there had been no decision to move NATO eastward to include Ukraine, there would be no war in Ukraine."

Joining me now, Dinesh D'Souza, host of "The Dinesh D'Souza Podcast" and conservative commentator and filmmaker. Dinesh, it looks like he was -- it seems like there was a lot of wisdom in what he said, but of course the foreign policy establishment is trying to gloss over all of that and, basically, expiate itself from any culpability in how this all on unfolded. Was this inevitable in Ukraine, as some would say?

DINESH D'SOUZA, CONSERVATIVE COMMENTATOR: Not at all. I think Mearsheimer represents the realist school of thinking about foreign policy. And the realist school is, I think, a very important voice to listen to, because Russia is not quite in the same boat as, say, China. With China, you have a communist party, you have a Marxist-Leninist ideology that's transmitted through the party and through the schools.

In Russia you have something more of a gangster regime. And what that means is that these are guys who respect the language of power. And that's what really the realist analysis is all about. You have a large country, Russia, sort of a grizzly bear, and then you have got this small little puppy dog, the Ukraine, right next to it. And essentially what Mearsheimer is saying that imposes certain limitations on the Ukraine. It's going to have to learn to sort of get along, if even nervously, with this big grizzly bear.

And what he's saying is that the neoliberals in the west have now for 20 years been sort of urging the Ukraine to poke the bear. Poke the grizzly. We are on your side. You join the west. We are going to form an invincible alliance. Putin is on his way out. And so Ukraine goes yes, yes, OK, well, bite, bite, snap, snap. And then the grizzly turns around.

And so what Mearsheimer is saying is that there is a kind of lack of respect for the normal facts of geography, power politics. And in a sense, I don't agree with him that the United States or the west are to blame for what's happening in the Ukraine, but what he is saying is he's made -- is that we have made the conflict more likely by pursuing a policy of illusion rather than realism.

INGRAHAM: The quick way of saying this is there may have been a possibility to cut a deal with Putin. Is that what you're saying?

D'SOUZA: Yes. I'm saying we've got to understand that when you have a country -- the United States is stronger than Russia, yes, I agree. But the United States is not stronger than Russia when you're doing with a conflict that's right at the Russian border. It's not easy for us to engage the Russians over there. Nor are we willing to make that kind of commitment.

So to lead on the Ukrainians into thinking, listen, be tough guys. We'll be behind you. And then when the fighting starts, we suddenly start resorting to all kinds of symbolic nonsense like pouring out Russian vodka and preventing a Russian singer from performing in the Met, and telling them we'll give them lessons in fighting by Zoom calls and Skype, this reveals the unseriousness of the western approach to a very serious situation.

INGRAHAM: Back to Mearsheimer. He has been sounding the alarm on this for years. Few paid attention to him, and he basically predicted this in 2015.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN MEARSHEIMER, UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO POLITICAL SCIENCE PROFESSOR: We are encouraging the Ukrainians to think that they will ultimately become part of the west, because will ultimately defeat Putin. The Ukrainians are almost completely unwilling to compromise with the Russians. They do that, the end result is that their country is going to be wrecked. And what we are doing is in effect encouraging that outcome.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: He is saying that they were led down a garden path, Dinesh, and now it's a garden of tragedy and suffering.

D'SOUZA: Exactly. And I think that we need to have more of this kind of debate in this country, which we're not getting. We're getting a kind of trumpeted ideology, and if you fall outside of what the party line is, you're supposed to be pro-Putin or you are off the reservation. And so I think that the kind of discussion that Mearsheimer is trying to have is not occurring right now.

INGRAHAM: Dinesh, the weird thing is that when you and I were in college, the lefties were defending Russia, the Soviet Union. They were defending the Soviet Union back then. Now it's a very, very odd dynamic. It's a switcheroo. Dinesh, thank you.

Who is really running the war now? The answer when we return.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The report indicated that senior Chinese officials had some level of knowledge about Russia's plans for military action. What is your comment on this?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The report by "The New York Times" is pure fake news. Such practice of diverting attention and blame-shifting is despicable.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: That's despicable, but that's exactly what China is doing. They hope the world leaders and all of you just ignore the fact that they are propping up Putin's murderous march through Ukraine. The sad thing, though, it's working. The Biden administration has zero interest in holding China accountable for what's happening in Ukraine. Wall Street certainly doesn't want to do it. Can't upset the markets. And this is the CCP's war, and it's time they were made to pay for it.

Joining me now, Mike Pillsbury, director of the Center on Chinese Strategy at Hudson, author of "The Hundred-Year Marathon." Mike, you've learned some new information about how China is currently aiding and abetting Russia. What is it?

MIKE PILLSBURY, "THE HUNDRED-YEAR MARATHON" AUTHOR: There's several things, Laura. I think the most important is you remember all the talk about the SWIFT system and kicking Russia out of the SWIFT system so they wouldn't be able to do transfers to 11,000 banks. That was going to really hurt Russia.

It turns out China over the last six years has developed its own worldwide SWIFT system. It's called the Cross-BORDER Interbank System. They are offering that to the Russians. So it softens one of the major sanctions on Russia.

The second thing that's been going on is you find this amazing voting by the Chinese that they are not condemning the invasion of a sovereign nation. This goes back to Xi Jinping meeting with Putin more than 30 times. It was Xi Jinping's first visit when he took over China was to go to Russia. And we have this wonderful comment from "The Wall Street Journal" that Putin said to Xi Jinping at their first meeting, your personality is a lot like my personality.

INGRAHAM: Great.

PILLSBURY: So is it friendship that has no bounds, as they said at the Olympics.

Now there's this new leak just yesterday from a European official that Putin actually had to surrender to a request from Xi Jinping, please don't do the invasion of Ukraine until after the Olympics is over. This has made it tougher on the Russian military in Ukraine because they were relying on the cold, hard ground to get their tanks across. By Putin delaying two or three weeks before his friend Xi Jinping, or you might say his backstage boss Xi Jinping, has complicated matters for the Russian troops on the ground. I teach mandarin all the time Laura. There is a phrase call "Houtai-Laoban" (ph). A Houtai-Laoban (ph) means a backstage boss. That's kind of how the Chinese see their role with Putin. They essentially control him, and they can stop the war.

INGRAHAM: How do you say it? How do you say it, Mike? Mike, say it again. How do you say it?

PILLSBURY: Houtai-Laoban (ph).

INGRAHAM: Houtai-Laoban (ph).

PILLSBURY: "Houtai" (ph) means "behind the stage," "Laoban" (ph) means "boss."

(LAUGHTER)

PILLSBURY: So China is the Houtai-Laoban (ph)

INGRAHAM: I love how you purposefully -- Mike speaks mandarin. But I like how you purposely mispronounce Putin's name, though. I love how you do that, Mike. It's purposeful on your part.

PILLSBURY: It's the Chinese pronunciation.

(LAUGHTER)

INGRAHAM: Yes, exactly. Mike, but you have been warning about this for years. I'm right behind you on that. The worst thing that could've happened was a China-Russian alliance. And here we are. All the brainiacs at all the international think tanks, and here we are.

PILLSBURY: It's a geopolitical nightmare.

INGRAHAM: Mike, thank you. Great to see you tonight. I'm sure Putin appreciates it.

Donald Trump bagged a lot of RINOs in his day, and one revealed today why he might be the biggest trophy of them all. The Last Bite explains.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: A former Republican senator with a new worth of about $100 million says all you little people need to accept pain at the pump.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BOB CORKER, (R) FORMER TENNESSEE SENATOR: I hear people complaining, understandably, about gasoline prices and that kind of thing. But it's a small price. It's a small price to pay for supporting a country that wants to move our way, that has the same dreams and aspirations that we as a nation have. And I don't think we are doing the kind of job that we need to be doing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Too bad Trump didn't pick him secretary of state, right. That was a great loss.

Shannon Bream and Benjamin Hall take it all from here.

Content and Programming Copyright 2022 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2022 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.