Wisenberg: Nadler doesn't know what to do

close

Video

Wisenberg: Nadler doesn't know what to do

Former independent counsel Robert Ray and former deputy independent counsel Sol Wisenberg react to James Comey's dossier claims, McGahn skipping House hearing.

This is a rush transcript from "The Ingraham Angle," May 21, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

LAURA INGRAHAM, HOST: I'm Laura Ingraham. This is "The Ingraham Angle" from D.C. tonight. Newt Gingrich is here in moments. Oh, my gosh! I cannot wait to talk to him.

The Democrats, are they wrong, though, to think that culture wars favor them? Plus, he's going to break down the Dems' new, yes, impeachment obsession. We've got lots of new legal news as well. We're going to unveil a new theory about what former FBI Director Jim Comey was trying to do when he briefed newly elected President Trump about that phony dossier. And he knew it was bunk.

Plus, investigative reporter Peter Schweizer is going to tell us about the latest and very troubling ties between the Biden family and corrupt foreign actors, wouldn't you know. And be sure to stay for this. Jimmie J.J. Walker of Good Times fame is here to react to why celebrities are using now late- night TV appearances as a form of resistance therapy. Total meltdowns in Tinseltown.

But first, Democrats misread America. That's the focus of tonight's ANGLE.

And as they try to find their footing in this red-hot Trump economy, for 2020 Democrats are resorting to hyperbole and endless and predictable personal attacks. Their instinct is to demean, not debate.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN, D-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Are we a nation to believe ripping children from the arms of their parents at the border? No. Here we go. But Trump does.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So you definitely would agree that he is a racist?

SEN. KAMALA HARRIS, D-CALIF., PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I do. Yes. Yes.

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS, I-VT, D-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We have a President today who is a racist, who is a sexist, who is a religious bigot. But that is the damn truth--

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: No, Bernie, it's not the darn truth. I'm not saying your word. Now, this is all sound and fury signifying zip. And it's hard to see that any of this is really moving the needle with independence or, heaven forbid, Trump voters. Yet in the absence of a compelling agenda, the Democrats are left to marinate in their own radicalism. And how extreme have they become? Well, they now believe that the constitution allows for fully viable innocent babies, both preborn and born, to be killed by the most gruesome measures.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. RALPH NORTHAM, D-VA: The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: To this day, none of the 2020 Democrats - now, there are 23 of them. None of them have condemned that statement by the still sitting Virginia Governor Northam. Now, in fact, they all seem to be on board with what he said. But of course, they call it something else. They call it women's reproductive health or just - and I love this - a choice, as if we're talking about picking out a handbag or a pair of earrings. The only ones who don't get a choice in this equation are the baby and the father, ever.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SANDERS: There is a well-funded attack coordinated by right-wing extremists to deny women the right to control their own bodies and their own futures.

MAYOR PETE BUTTIGIEG, D-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I trust women to draw the line when it's their--

(APPLAUSE)

HARRIS: Governments should not be in the business of telling a woman what she should do with her own body.

SEN. KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, D-N.Y., PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I think that the Hyde Amendment should be repealed and that we actually need to make sure that women, regardless of their income level, have a basic right to reproductive care.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Lots of euphemisms. Now, rather than trying to appeal to the vast middle class of America, the Democrats are trying to out-meddle one another in the radical Olympics. And not just on the issue of abortion but on a lot of other cultural issues as well. For instance, such as gender identification. We talked about that last week.

Now, this radical social agenda was originally developed and conceived in the academy. And it was meant to upend the old order, the traditional family structure that has been at the core of every major civilization throughout history.

And this new world order, this new world view, was then mainstreamed by the popular culture and eventually embraced by Democrats and even some Republicans. And it has now become a new politically correct orthodoxy, and it's extremist and totally unyielding.

On issues such as gender and abortion, its adherence are vicious. If you dare disagree with their worldview, they believe that you should lose your job and frankly be banished forever from the public square. And no, I'm not exaggerating. But it wasn't always this way. This was Barack Obama back in 2008.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Define marriage.

BARACK OBAMA, FORMER PRESIDENT: I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now, for me as a Christian - for me--

(APPLAUSE)

OBAMA: For me as a Christian, it's also a sacred union.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Now, in his book, David Axelrod revealed that Barack Obama was lying when he said that, that he was just basically saying that to get elected. And a lot of people have evolved, that's for sure.

Well, just like now, we know that Hillary Clinton was lying when she said this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HILLARY CLINTON, FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE: We can support a woman's right to choose that makes abortion safe, legal, and rare, and reduces the number of abortions.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: What happened to the rare part? A million a year? At least now the Democrats have unmasked themselves. It's kind of liberating. The euphemisms about a woman's choice, they don't really work anymore, now that the New York State legislature gave itself a standing ovation as they went far beyond the old language and legalized infanticide. Yet much of the country is becoming more pro-life. You'd never know it by reading a lot of the newspapers, particularly in the later stages of pregnancy. This has been the case for some time.

Now, Democrats think that the new Alabama law that outlaws most abortions, they think it gives them a huge opening in 2020. They've been looking for an opening. But as usual, they misread the country.

First, Alabama didn't pass the law to score political points. Alabamians passed the law because they believe that they were saving the lives of innocent babies. For Christians and others who believe abortion is the taking of an innocent life, no amount of vilification of their position by Hollywood or the news media or Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, anybody, is going to change their moral determination.

Trump, by the way, recognized this in 2016.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT: If you go with what Hillary is saying in the ninth month, you can take the baby and rip the baby out of the womb of the mother just prior to the birth of the baby.

Now, you can say that that's OK and Hillary can say that that's OK, but it's not OK with me.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: In normal press settings, Democrats are rarely asked uncomfortable specifics about what it is, abortion. And they're usually able to skate through with generalities and bromides that we've heard a thousand times before. Now, Trump, I don't think, let's his opponents glide by so easily.

And second, regarding those so-called experts who think that the social issues are going to hurt Republican prospects, I'll remind you that many of these same experts have been saying the same thing since Roe versus Wade was decided back in 1973. And remember, these are many of the same people who said Trump would lose in 2016 for the same reasons.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Trump's comments on abortion and his vow to select Supreme Court Justices who would overturn Roe versus Wade likely won't help his pitch to women voters.

CECILE RICHARDS, PRESIDENT, PLANNED PARENTHOOD ACTION FUND: Donald Trump has no idea about women, about women's health. And his entire campaign has been this scorched-earth attitude.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Just one question. Who is in the White House today? And that's THE ANGLE.

All right. Joining me now to react, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Fox News Contributor, and host of the new podcast, Newt's World.

All right. Speaker, you and I've been running around Washington for a long time watching these various debates, the culture wars and so forth. Why are the Democrats continuing to have this blind spot on where many in the middle reside on issues such as the issue of life?

NEWT GINGRICH, FORMER SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: Look, I think that the true faith of the left-winged Democratic Party is now in full blossom. I think they get together in meetings, talk to each other, go out to fundraisers with people who agree with them, and convince themselves, for example, as you pointed out.

I mean, I - if you had ever said to me five, 10, 15 years ago that we would be approving infanticide and, as you point out, the New York legislature would be applauding and cheering that they passed the right to kill babies after they are born, this is grotesque. And most Americans don't agree with it.

But among the hard-core left, on issue after issue after issue, they believe things that I think personally are crazy. And I don't think the American people will endorse, and I think it may set up a 1972 George McGovern disaster where they ended up so far out on left-wing limb that people decided they just can't vote for him.

INGRAHAM: Well, I think, Newt, going back to Phyllis Schlafly and the Equal Rights Amendment, she successfully led the effort to kill the ERA. I remember reading about how the Democrats back then thought, "Oh, we got them now, we're going to vanquish the Republican Party forever." And what happened a few years later, Ronald Reagan was elected.

So - I mean, they've been - they've been hitting the same drum for decades about the social issues, but these social issues don't go away. The Democrats just keep moving further and further to the left.

GINGRICH: Look, I was in California over the weekend talking to people, and the number of women who came up to me and said they're really worried because they think their daughters are not going to be able to have a successful women's sports program because of the drive of the Democrats to basically allow transgender males to dominate women sports. I don't think people have realized yet what an assault this is going to be--

INGRAHAM: Oh, my gosh!

GINGRICH: --on woman and on right to compete. But that's the sort of thing you're not going to get Vogue magazine to print and you're not going to get The New York Times to print. And that's why it takes a while. The country gradually recoils after the left-wing establishment has done all it could. And I think you're going to see that kind of recoil on eight or 10 or 12 issues this coming year.

INGRAHAM: Yes. I think - you can kind of picture, Newt, Trump looking at his Democratic opponent and saying, now, your party actually passed legislation in the House that would compel girls and a locker room to welcome a biological male in the locker room while they're getting ready for their sports or leaving the locker room. But that would be compelled by federal law. Right?

I mean, Trump is never going to let them weasel out of it by saying--

GINGRICH: And by the way--

INGRAHAM: --well, I believe in choice. No, no. You want boys to shower in the same locker room as girls because that's what the legislation mandates. Right? And they're going to have to answer that question.

GINGRICH: Look, in Connecticut, two transgender males won the women's sports event for the state championship.

(CROSSTALK)

INGRAHAM: --yes.

GINGRICH: And - and let's be clear about this. This is the most bizarre reversal of all the principles of a 50-year fight for women's rights--

INGRAHAM: Yes, feminism. Where are the feminists?

GINGRICH: --that you've ever seen. I mean, you're presently going to have a transgender male soccer team. I mean, it's crazy in terms of what does all this do to women's rights to be able to compete and to be able to be involved in an environment where they actually have a reasonable chance to win?

INGRAHAM: Yes. Well - and again, they're so twisted up in knots and radicalism. I don't think - I don't think they know how to unknot themselves at this point.

By the way, Newt, this was wunderkind mayor, Pete Buttigieg, at the Supreme Court rally today on abortion.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUTTIGIEG: I think this is one more example of a moment where the majority of Americans agree on something. And there's a lot of extremism of the Republican Party that's forcing moderates to ask whether the Republican Party has left them behind.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Extremists in the Republican Party?

GINGRICH: Well--

INGRAHAM: Really?

GINGRICH: I don't know how to explain to - I don't know how to explain to the Mayor that the overwhelming majority of Americans, about 81 percent, are opposed to killing babies after they are born, that the positions he is taking are very minority positions. And I think that again and again, you have the same conversation going on. You have left-wing Democrats going to left-wing rallies to say left-wing things, the left-wing rally applauds. And then to compete, the next person comes in and has to be even more extreme. And that's why you have 20-some Democrats now running wildly to the left.

INGRAHAM: Well - and Newt, Kirsten Gillibrand is another individual who's been trying to regain - or gain, I should say, any traction in this very crowded field. And a lot of people thought after the Me Too movement, Harvey Weinstein, that she would really emerge from the pack, but she's also struggling. She said this about an issue near and dear to your heart, the Hyde Amendment. Let's watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GILLIBRAND: We have a tenant in our constitution. It's called separation of church and state. And I do not believe that that is a valid argument. I think that the Hyde Amendment should be repealed.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Newt, the Hyde Amendment. Tell “The Ingraham Angle” audience how radical that is if you want to repeal that. I'd love to do that national polling on that.

GINGRICH: Look, I think the Hyde Amendment goes back to the 1970s and is a very simple statement. No American should be forced to pay taxes to pay for an abortion. It has been a consistent position now for over 40 years. And again, but it's where they're going. I mean, they're going to say, one, we have the right to kill a baby after it's born; two, we have the right to charge the taxpayer while we're killing the baby.

I mean, think about this stuff. I think in a very radical position, Sanders -- Bernie Sanders said the other day he didn't mind if they had sex selection abortions. Well, that means everywhere on the planet these girl babies get aborted. I mean, there's no question statistically.

If you permit sex selection abortions, there'll be far more abortions of females than males. And that's what Sanders said he was willing to accept. So they're - they're sort of caught right now in a downward spiral not just on this issue but in a whole range of issues where I think that they're going to become harder and harder to defend.

INGRAHAM: We played the sound bite earlier Newt, in “The Angle,” just demonstrating how far left the Democrats have been pulled. Now, I think Obama has always been there, but the party hasn't. And so whether it's on the question of gay marriage or the issue of abortion or now gender bending and also - I mean, you've got to - you've got to sense that Biden is not comfortable with any of this. I mean, he's got to be like saying, wait, my consultants are telling me I've got to say this stuff, but my God, I still got to go to mass on Sunday, I still got to like - I still got to figure this out.

GINGRICH: Well, look, as he pointed out earlier when you showed the segment of Obama lying about his position on marriage, Obama was always a radical who understood he couldn't get elected as a radical. So in the classic tradition, he pretended to be moderate long enough to get elected.

But the thing to remember about Biden - and I've known Biden for a long time. Joe Biden is so shallow that he won't notice most of this. He was just thinking it's kind of confusing. And he'll drift along being Joe Biden. And if he can get nominated, it'd be by being this nice pleasant doofus who doesn't know anything, but he's not the other people. And I think that's what he's counting on, as being the least disgusting person in the field.

INGRAHAM: And Newt, we're almost out of time. But the other issue that we've touched on last night was this move against the founders. This has been bubbling up for some time, pulling down statues and so forth. Everyone feels better when you, I guess, pull down a Robert E. Lee statue. That's like that - it was a big obsession last year and the year before.

But now, of course, as predicted, moving against Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence. Buttigieg says, well, we can rename our dinner maybe because we have people of all - but if we can rename a dinner, not Jefferson-Jackson, Jackson-Jefferson, rename that. Why wouldn't you rename schools, boulevards, and ultimately take down statues? I mean, if a dinner is objectionable, what about a school name?

GINGRICH: Look, one of the things I've concluded is these people are now so radical, we have to take them head-on. This is left-wing fascist totalitarianism. This is an effort to erase the memory of the United States. Thomas Jefferson is a fact. He wrote the Declaration of Independence.

He was the - he created the Democratic Party ironically in terms of people who now want to besmirch them. He was extraordinarily important in the development of America. But what you have is a group of left-wing Democrats who would like to erase all of our memories of America. They really dive deep down, would like us to Venezuela. And I think that it's remarkable, and I think we on the conservative side have to be much tougher--

INGRAHAM: Much tougher.

GINGRICH: --by him head-on and saying what it is.

INGRAHAM: Well, it's Taliban - it's Taliban ask.

GINGRICH: So - well, as I said, it's exactly like the Taliban destroying the two Buddhist statues that were historic worldwide monuments. And you have people - Pete pretends that he's exactly like Obama. He pretends to be a moderate until you listen to him a little bit and realize he's as radical as anybody else.

INGRAHAM: Yes. And an extremist with a moderate exterior or a mild-mannered exterior.

GINGRICH: Right.

INGRAHAM: Mr. Speaker, you were so great we didn't have time to get into the Dems' impeachment obsession, but they're not going anywhere with impeachment, at least in my view. Thank you so much. Fantastic segment, as always.

Next, we're going to dig into the misdeeds of fired FBI Director Jim Comey. Now, with a particular focus tonight, on his motive during his briefing to President Trump on the debunked dossier. Two men familiar with the government corruption, you bet, Robert Ray and Sol Wisenberg, are here to break it all down, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAMES COMEY, FORMER FBI DIRECTOR: The bureau began an effort after we got the Steele dossier to try and see how much of it we could replicate. There were a lot of spokes off of that that we didn't know whether they were true or false, and we were trying to figure out what we could make of it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: Disgraced former FBI Director Jim Comey is now changing his tune about that anti-Trump dossier that sparked the Russia investigation. Comey told ABC News that he didn't think the document was credible. And now, he's shifting the blame to former Intel Chief John Brennan and Jim Clapper for including it in that intel report that was given to President Trump in January of 2016 - January of 2017, obviously, weeks before his inauguration.

But we do have some questions tonight. Specifically, did Comey know when he briefed Trump that the dossier was developed and paid for by Hillary Clinton? Did the former FBI Director tell the soon-to-be President that he doubted its accuracy, really doubted its accuracy? Did he inform the President that the dossier was the basis for a FISA warrant to spy on the Trump campaign? Now, if they thought Trump was truly a threat, why even brief him on any of the details at all?

Well, it strikes me that the only explanation is that Comey was trying to scare Trump with this brief that the briefing itself was part of a larger plan to get it leaked and take Trump down at the beginning (inaudible).

Here now, Robert Ray, former Independent Counsel, and Sol Wisenberg, former Deputy Independent Counsel, Fox News Contributor.

Robert, what's the most important outstanding question in your view about Comey's role in this as far as you're concerned?

ROBERT RAY, FORMER INDEPENDENT COUNSEL: He clearly was cagey with the President, as you have suggested, in that January 6, 2017 meeting with the President when he joined with the other intelligence chiefs to - remember, he stayed behind and briefed the President-Elect with regard to what he decided he wanted to share with the President.

So it raises all kinds of questions about what the FBI Director's motives were going back to the 2016 campaign. And I think, by that point, meaning by January of 2017, it's clear, because within 18 days thereafter, he sends two FBI agents into the White House to interview Michael Flynn.

He had already essentially chosen sides in this and was acting in what I think is at least the charitable interpretation. He was acting adversarial to the President-Elect and soon to be President of the United States. Meaning, in essence, that his position and the position of the FBI was that he was going to protect the American people from the duly-elected President of the country. And--

INGRAHAM: Sol, you're--

RAY: And that's a--

INGRAHAM: Yes.

RAY: That's a scary thing. I do think that that is among the questions that the Attorney General Bill Barr now is going to be looking at from the standpoint, one, of deciding whether or not any crimes were committed, and second, if not that, whether there are people remaining in the Department of Justice or at the FBI--

INGRAHAM: Right, who knew about this at all (ph).

RAY: --who should be subject to disciplinary action. And third, and probably most importantly, so that in the President's words, a Presidential candidate never has to face this again. We have some real hard questions about how the FBI wandered off in the wilderness here without supervision from leadership at the Department of Justice.

INGRAHAM: Yes. All right. Sol - yes. I got to get to Sol. Sol, there's a lot here to unpack. But we now have the - on Capitol Hill, they're trying to pull in Hope Hicks, Former Communications Director, Don McGahn, and stiff armed them today. Hope Hicks and Don McGahn's Chief of Staff, Annie Donaldson, at the Capitol Hill, we have Nadler threatening, of course, contempt to - holding him in contempt, threatening other subpoenas beyond these two new subpoenas today. What gives here? Is it because Barr is going to get closer and the Connecticut U.S. Attorney is going to get closer to the truth?

SOL WISENBERG, FORMER DEPUTY INDEPENDENT COUNSEL: That could be it. I just think that Nadler doesn't really know exactly what to do. I mean, I think they've terribly misplayed their hand here. The fact is, as I said last time I was on your show, these battles, these checks and balances battles have gone on in throughout the history of the republic. There's nothing wrong with subpoenaing these people, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with the President coming in, in most circumstances if the circumstances are appropriate, and saying, I'm going to invoke executive privilege. That's kind of what it's all about.

We need to learn to distinguish between totally improper and demagogic subpoenas like the one to William Barr and the subpoena to Steve Mnuchin. You might not like what they are trying to do to Steve Mnuchin, but in that particular case there is a statute that says Congress can do this. The Congress can go to the IRS and say give us a tax return. So you've got to tell me, if you are talking to me about something, what's the particular thing you are subpoenaing the person for, what you trying to do, and what are they claiming? It doesn't lend itself easily to gross generalizations.

INGRAHAM: And of course, just a quick note, Hope Hicks, everybody probably knows, but current EVP and Chief Communications Officer for the Fox Corporation. And by the way, conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch, guys, is now suing the DOJ for any copies of a chart that apparently they had compiled, they had drawn up, that shows statutes that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton could have violated for that unauthorized use of the private email server. Now, that chart apparently was disseminated within the FBI and excluded any section for just gross negligence, the reason for no prosecution stated by Comey in the summer of 2016. So Robert, is that significant? And why is Judicial Watch going after that particular chart?

ROBERT RAY, FORMER INDEPENDENT COUNSEL: As former attorney general Mike Mukasey has pointed out, that was always the centerpiece of the inquiry relative to the former secretary of state, meaning that if there was an avenue for prosecution that was it, and it was on the gross negligence standard.

Ultimately what happened here is, as we all recall, the attorney general essentially was conflicted and stepped aside in favor of the FBI director to make the call, and also that includes the deputy attorney general. So neither one of them did their job. And then it was left to Jim Comey to step in and resolve this. And of course then he made a mess of things by essentially acting like a prosecutor even though he was an investigator and the FBI director, the sum and substance of which, ultimately that became grounds through Rod Rosenstein for the president to fire him.

So I don't know. The whole thing is a colossal, was then and is now, a colossal mess, and it doesn't surprise me that the FBI would have a chart that would leave off the one place they didn’t want to go, which was to talk about the fact that there was sufficient evidence with regard to gross negligence, and nevertheless the FBI director decided not to prosecute.

INGRAHAM: All right, guys, it is all just reckless. It was just reckless conduct, couldn’t indict. Thanks so much, guys.

And our next guest was the first investigative reporter to dig into the Biden family's questionable overseas ties. In moments he will be here to discuss the latest revelation against the former vice president's son. Stay there.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Don't you think that should be investigated, that financial connection, the Chinese government putting billions of dollars into Biden family business?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT: Hundred percent. It's a disgrace.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: The president calling for an investigation into the financial connection between China and the Biden family. But tonight, we are learning even more than we did before about Biden's overseas ties. Buried 11 paragraphs inside an article called "Trump's Demands for Investigations of Opponents Draw Intensifying Criticism," "The New York Times" detailed that in addition to his China and Ukraine connections, Biden's son Hunter also advised a Romanian businessman who eventually was convicted and imprisoned for corruption. He even vouched for him in front of Congress.

With me now is Peter Schweizer, president of the Government Accountability Institute and the author of the book "Secret Empires." So Peter, you have been months ahead of "The New York Times" and other publications on this issue. Why has the Joe Biden family escaped scrutiny on these overseas ties for so long, especially when they are combing through every white Russian a Trump family member ever drank, though they don't drink?

PETER SCHWEIZER, INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST: It's a great question, Laura, and I think it's a combination of things, but the bottom line is the scrutiny has not been there. Joe Biden and Hunter Biden went to China together in December of 2013. Ten days after that trip Hunter Biden gets this billion-dollar deal with the Chinese government, the media never covered it. In 2014 he strikes the deal with the Ukrainians. That gets covered a little bit but they donŸ_Tt know the terms of it. The hit parade goes on.

We go from China to Ukraine, now to Romania where this businessman in Romania, Mr. Popoviciu, is brought up on corruption charges and convicted in his own country. According to the Romanian media, he hired Hunter Biden to lobby on his behalf in the United States, in effect to try to get the United States government to call off the Ukrainians from their prosecution and eventual imprisonment of this businessman.

INGRAHAM: Peter, hold on, hold on. Was Hunter Biden even registered as a foreign lobbyist? No.

SCHWEIZER: No. He was not registered as a lobbyist. He was a lobbyist up until 2008 when his father ran for vice president. He represented online gambling companies. But in 2017 when he took on this case he did not register as a foreign agent and he did not register in general as a lobbyist, period.

INGRAHAM: You know what this reminds me of, Peter? It reminds me of when Hillary was secretary of state, and on then the Clinton Foundation started getting all these donations from all these foreign governments, foreign entities, and then they all dried up when her presidential ambitions went up in flames. It's kind of the same kind of deal, except it's not for profit.

SCHWEIZER: It is, that's exactly right. And look, the mystifying thing, Laura, is you and I both know, and I think most Americans know, if the name here was Don Jr. and not Hunter Biden that the media would be all over this. And it's surprising to me the lack of curiosity that a sitting vice president's son is striking three major deals with the Chinese government while he is steering U.S. policy towards China, the deal with Ukraine, all of this stuff. If this was Don Jr. you know he would be sitting in front of Congress, and he should if he actually did that. But Hunter Biden needs to do that. The Senate needs to ask him to testify.

INGRAHAM: Where are the other Democrat candidates calling, asking these questions as well? They have a curious lack of interest in this. Peter, thanks so much.

And coming up, celebrities are now using late-night shows to whine about their new hatred, or not their new hatred, about their hatred for President Trump. Jimmie J.J. Walker is here of "Good Times" fame. He has a message for those Hollywood crybabies.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: Late-night is the left's new therapy couch. Who cares what you have to promote when you can come to promote your hatred of Trump? Last night on Colbert, actress Julianna Margulies revealed that reading the news has given her nightmares. It's so scary.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JULIANNA MARGULIES, ACTRESS: I do not read the news at night because I was waking up in the middle of the night from nightmares.

I was in a boardroom, there was a long table, and it was just a guy who is in the Oval Office right now sitting there. And I walked in and I was screaming, screaming. Don't you care about the next -- I was going crazy and screaming at him and yelling. And that was 2016, and I woke up in a sweat, and I went, oh, my God, I've gone insane and I have to stop reading the news at night.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: She is just the latest in a long line of celebs who have lost their collective minds over Trump. Joining me now is comedian and actor Jimmie J.J. Walker, star of the iconic series "Good Times." Jimmie, it's great to see you. This has to just be bad acting on the part of these Hollywood celebrities. Is Margulies so sensitive that even reading an article gives her Trump-mares, Trump nightmares?

JIMMIE WALKER, ACTOR AND COMEDIAN: At this stage of the game, first of all, she is a very fine actress, a good person. But she must realize I'm a celebrity and I'm doing very well. Why am I doing well? A lot has to do with the Trump economy, et cetera, et cetera. People in the business have to realize they should use their celebrity as a positive thing rather than a negative thing. If you have a little complaint with the president -- of all people, Kim Kardashian has done a great job of working with prison reform. She didn't go in screaming at the president, attacking the office. She went in and presented some facts and actually has gotten people relieved of jail duty.

It's the same thing that just happened with Joey Cora of the Boston Red Sox. He would not go to the White House. He is complaining about what's going on in Puerto Rico. Why not go to the White House and talk to the president and say, hey, look, I feel this, I feel that, rather than attacking and putting down our government, which has done great for Joey Cora, which has done great for Kim Kardashian. This is a country --

INGRAHAM: And you know what's really the case as well, J.J., is that Trump is very approachable, and he actually wants to get along with people. I know they don't think that, but if they spent five minutes outside of their rage bubble and actually thought for a second about the power of persuasion, they are not really persuading anyone except maybe their manager and P.R. director, their driver.

WALKER: Unfortunately, in Hollywood you become a pariah if you say, you know, Trump is not a bad guy. If you say that, people go, oh, how horrible you are. And all these are people that are making very nice dough doing --

INGRAHAM: Intolerant.

WALKER: Yes. They are totally intolerant of anything that Trump does, even when the facts come out in terms of 3.8, 3.9 unemployment.

INGRAHAM: They don't care about that. They don't care about facts. Jimmie, I've got to play another sound bite. This is Julianna -- not just Julianna. It was Ellen Page's emotional breakdown on the Colbert couch just a few months back.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ELLEN PAGE, ACTRESS: If you are in a position of power and you hate people, and you want to cause suffering to them, you go through the trouble, you spend your career trying to cause suffering, what do you think is going to happen? Kids are going to be abused, and they're going to kill themselves, and people are going to be beaten on the street.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: That was following the Jussie Smollett hoax, by the way.

WALKER: The Jussie Smollett thing had nothing to do with Donald Trump, and it had to do all with Jussie Smollett. And it's an embarrassing situation that the government has gone against us in terms of the local government there. And I think we need to get -- Ellen Page is Canadian, first of all, let's just throw that in as a fact. And the fact that all these people are doing very, very well under this government that they supposedly think is so horrible.

INGRAHAM: All right, Jimmie, we are out of time. But everyone go see Jimmie's show if you are in the area because he is really, really funny, and we appreciate you coming on.

Up next, hypocrisy at its finest.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: House Oversight Chair Elijah Cummings could be taking some heat for alleged illegal use of funds by a charity run by his wife, according to an IRS complaint filed by an ethics watchdog group. Now, for all the details we go to Trace Gallagher who is in our West Coast Newsroom tonight. Trace?

TRACE GALLAGHER, CORRESPONDENT: Laura, as Chair of the House Oversight Committee, Maryland Democrat Elijah Cummings says he has a mandate to be a check on the administration for any possible corruption. Quote, "I'm not here to make headlines. I'm here to get people's problems solved." And yet Congressman Cummings is making headlines. A conservative government watchdog group, National Legal and Policy Center, or NLPC, has filed a complaint with the IRS looking into possible unethical behavior involving Cummings and has 48-year-old wife Maya Rockeymoore, who runs a nonprofit called Center for Global Policy Solutions, and a for profit consulting firm called Global Policy Solutions, almost the same name. And the complaint says they appear to operate as a single entity.

In recent years the nonprofit has reportedly taken and millions of dollars in grants from companies like Google, J.P. Morgan, and Prudential, which also have business interests before the House Oversight Committee.

Then there is the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation by the men who established Johnson & Johnson, which gave more than $5 million to both Maya Rockeymoore's consulting firm and her nonprofit. But the report says in 2017 the foundation stopped supporting her groups, and in recent months, Cummings has been a vocal opponent of Johnson & Johnson, targeting the company as part of the Oversight Committee's probe of drug prices. Now the NLPC says Maya Rockeymoore won't let them look at her nonprofit's financial records, which is required by the IRS. And of course, Elijah Cummings is on his own request for documents. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What you think needs to be investigated?

REP. ELIJAH CUMMINGS, D-MD, CHAIRMAN, HOUSE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE: Oh, my God. I think we need to look at the finances of the president.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GALLAGHER: Maya Rockeymoore calls this report a hit piece, quote, "filled with faulty research, lies, and innuendo in an attempt to tarnish my personal reputation, professional work, and public service, as well as that of my spouse." Elijah Cummings calls the report a, quote, "fabricated distraction from the important work being done on behalf of Americans." NLPC says it appears Cummings has some tax problems of his own. Laura?

INGRAHAM: Trace, thanks so much.

And Nancy Pelosi needs a history lesson. Tonight's Last Bite will tell you why.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

INGRAHAM: It's time for the Last Bite. Today the woman who is second in line for the presidency couldn't quite recall the name of the process by which we elect a president.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. NANCY PELOSI, D-CALIF., HOUSE SPEAKER: The American people elected him president, not by the popular vote, but by the college, the Electoral College.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

INGRAHAM: I'm sure grandma Mimi just had a long day. It happens to the best of us. What show is this? Oh, we had a great show. But don't forget, get to check out my podcast, podcastone.com. Subscribe there, also iTunes. Shannon Bream and the "Fox News @ Night" team, take it all from here.

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.