‘The Ingraham Angle’ on DOJ’s lack of transparency on Trump raid – Fox News

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

This is a rush transcript from “The Ingraham Angle,” August 15, 2022. 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 the swampy, sleazy, third world banana republic known as Washington, DC.

All right. The first rule of the DC establishment, always trust that the deep state will operate in good faith. Well, that’s the view that put the Patriot Act on a glide path to passage back in 2001, remember? And that’s what kept the bias Mueller investigation going for the majority of Trump’s time in office.

They tell us to trust the process. How dare anyone question our dedicated civil servants? We’re supposed to just, I guess, look past the years of sleaze and corruption of Hunter Biden and Hillary Clinton, and the DOJ’s kid-glove treatment of it all.

Past the Democrats’ tolerance of months of riots that rip this country to shreds in 2020 and, of course, of their own vilification of local law enforcement. Anytime a thug is shot, who resists, arrests. Always going to be the police’s fault.

Well, I’m sorry to break it to you. But tens of millions of Americans don’t trust the Biden FBI or the DOJ. And it’s more than just a double standard or the usual Washington hypocrisy at play. We’re used to that. It’s distrust that’s based in fact in recent history.

And today, they gave us no other reason – another reason not to trust them. The DOJ officially opposed the release of that affidavit you’ve been hearing about that, supposedly, they say, establishes probable cause to carry out the search of Mar-a-Lago. They claim that they’re willing to unseal other documents, whatever that means.

Now, this petition was signed by South Florida U.S. Attorney Juan Antonio Gonzalez and DOJ Counterintel chief Jay Bratt. They mentioned a specific concern about outing cooperating witnesses. Well, I’m sorry. This is absurd. With everything that’s on the line here, including the possible 2024 election, this is simply not acceptable.

You know what it reminds me of, I was thinking about this today, reminds me of the anonymous whistleblower who the Democrats relied on for their first impeachment circus against Trump. So tonight, I’m telling you that Merrick Garland owes more than this to the nation. A redacted affidavit is better than no affidavit at all.


JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Is there a risk that the Justice Department by trying to block the release of this affidavit looks like they’re trying to be too secretive?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Absolutely. There’s that risk. Prosecutors also have to live in reality, and it’s impossible to separate politics and law here. And I think the reality is, it will look like there’s a lack of transparency.


INGRAHAM: Yes, you bet, it does. Moment of candor there over at CNN.

There’s so many questions outstanding tonight, including whether President Trump himself will ask that the court released the affidavit. To answer that, we’re going to go right to his legal team to see where they stand.

Joining me now is Christina Bobb, attorney for President Trump, who was on site for that raid. Christina, thank you for joining us tonight. Does President Trump support or oppose the release of the affidavit?

CHRISTINA BOBB, ATTORNEY FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP: Well, President Trump has been very straightforward and that he supports all transparency through this process. And he wants what’s best for the American people, and he’s going to rely on the courts to do the right thing.

INGRAHAM: So he will not then submit, or you will not submit a motion to the court to release the affidavit in opposition to what the government said today?

BOBB: We support what Judicial Watch has started. We’re watching it very closely, trying to gauge what’s happening and will respond accordingly. So I don’t have an exact answer today. We’re watching the situation and seeing how it develops and will respond in a way that we think is best for the American people.

INGRAHAM: So no determine on – no determination on that as of now? Because that that is the most crucial piece of information because that document apparently establishes, they say, probable cause. It includes sensitive information, the government’s arguing. They don’t want to compromise, I guess, cooperating witnesses. And it’s their – so far it’s their case against President Trump such that it is.

BOBB: Right. You’re exactly right. And supposedly, it does have probable cause in it. I find that a little bit hard to believe, obviously, a judge signed it. But knowing the background in this situation, I don’t think there is probable cause to do what they did. So I am myself curious to see what’s in it. And we’re looking forward to seeing how this all plays out.

INGRAHAM: But you’re not – I mean – I don’t know, given the President’s comments earlier, we would think that he would want it all out there so everyone can see it in the light of day. I’m still not following what would the concern be on your part for not having it released?

BOBB: No. We are supporting it. We’re not – I’m not aware of any effort to oppose it. We just are following the lead of the case that’s already going and watching to see what happens in response to it. But he absolutely–

INGRAHAM: Fair. So he’s not opposing its release, but he’s not going to urge that it be released. Is that a correct characterization?

BOBB: I think, I would say that’s a fair assessment at this point. Yes.

INGRAHAM: OK. On the issue of the passports, which, to me is just another ridiculous wrinkle here. Earlier today, the President said that the FBI stole his three passports, one expired. That it’s an assault on a political opponent at a level never seen before in our country.

And apparently, you told our producers just before the show that the passports have now been picked up. So you’ve got the back, two expired, one’s the diplomatic passport that every former president gets to keep in his possession. What’s your view on this? Was just – this was just an honest mistake? Was it – were they (inaudible)

BOBB: I don’t know about any honest. I won’t give them that much credit at this point. I think this goes to show the level of audacity that they have. If you’re going to execute a raid on the primary residence of the President of the United States, you need to do it perfectly. There’s no room for error.

And when our Fourth Amendment rights are at stake, as a nation, you cannot be flippant in any way. So I don’t give them a pass as this was a simple mistake. I think it goes to show how aggressive they were, how overreaching they were, that they were willing to go past the four corners of the warrant and take whatever they felt was appropriate, or they felt that they could take and then go back through and look through everything.

And once they realized, Oh, whoops, maybe we went a little too far. Then negotiate the return of it. And that’s absolutely not the way a warrant is supposed to be executed. So no, I think they were wrong, and basically got caught.

INGRAHAM: Where were the passports? Were they in a safe? Were they in a drawer, a box? I mean, where were they?

BOBB: I don’t actually know. They were probably in the office, I would assume, because that makes the most sense. But, again, they didn’t disclose where they picked things up. So I can’t say for certain.

INGRAHAM: Now, in his first interview since the raid, the President told Fox News Digital that people are so angry at what is taking place. Whatever we can do to help, the temperature has to be brought down in the country. If it isn’t, terrible things are going to happen.

What did the President mean by terrible things are going to happen?

BOBB: I think he just is looking at what’s happening in the country and realizing the angst that people are going through. I think he’s saddened by the frustration that Americans are facing and realizing that their government has been hijacked by radicals, radicals that don’t care about the American people and don’t care about our quality of life and our culture.

As a culture, this is a new step that we’ve never experienced before, and a level to some extent of fear in the nation that the government’s becoming overreaching. And I think he’s concerned about that devolution of our culture and what we hold sacred. That is what I believe. I didn’t specifically ask him that question, but that would be my understanding that he doesn’t like the direction that the country is going.

INGRAHAM: Well, of course, the left is jumping on it saying, the President’s intimating that people could commit violence, there’d be another January 6. But you’re saying that’s not what you believe he was getting at. It was a corrosive effect.

BOBB: Correct. Not at all. President Trump loves this country. And he’s never supported violence, although the left has. So I think it’s a bit hypocritical and ironic that they would try to throw that narrative out when he has been peaceful and brought peace to the world and peace to this nation and is trying to bring peace to this nation.

He reached out to Merrick Garland and said, Anything I can do after you raided my personal residence. Sorry, this is through his attorneys. But he wanted a specific message to Merrick Garland. This was not them directly, saying, I want Merrick Garland to know that I support bringing this nation together and lowering the temperature as you said. What can I do? My resources are at your disposal. I’m willing to do anything.

And the DOJ ignored it. They didn’t respond. That was on Thursday morning, and then a few hours later, Merrick Garland gave a three-minute press brief, where he didn’t even bother to disclose to the American public that President Trump was trying to be helpful in this situation.

INGRAHAM: Well, what specifically was President Trump suggesting? I mean, everyone wants to bring the temperature down. I think that’s a noble desire, of course. But what specifically does he propose that he can do at this point?

BOBB: Sure. Well, I think it was looking at it saying, The American people don’t trust the FBI or DOJ. They lied about Russia, Russia, Russia. They lied about crossfire hurricane. They lied to Congress – Comey lied to Congress, and McCabe lied to everybody. They lied to the FISA court.

The American people rightfully don’t trust the FBI right now and don’t trust the Department of Justice. But they do trust President Trump. And he had a big platform, he had a big following. And so, I think it was a genuine olive branch to say, I’m trying to help this country. They don’t trust you, but they trust me. What can we do? And they ignored it.

INGRAHAM: Well, I mean, short of dropping the case, I’m not sure what Merrick Garland would do at this point. I mean, just drop – let’s move on. I mean, I don’t know what the Justice Department’s going to do. They’re not in favor of releasing the affidavit. We know that.

BOBB: Right. But I think it would go a long way to just show that they care that they are putting this nation through angst. The American people are frustrated and angry. They love Donald Trump, and no one believes that this is a real, a real case. They believe it’s a witch hunt. And so any attempt to come together, I think, is fair.

INGRAHAM: Christina, we really appreciate your joining us tonight. Thank you very much.

And joining me now is Ohio Congressman Jim Jordan. He’s a ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee; John Ratcliffe, former director of national intelligence; and Harmeet Dhillon, Chairwoman of the Republican National Lawyers Association.

John, you just heard that conversation. The DOJ lawyers argued against the affidavit release today by saying, “As the court is aware from its review of the affidavit, it contains, among other critically important and detailed investigative facts: highly sensitive info about witnesses, including witnesses interviewed by the government, and investigative techniques and information required by law to be kept under seal.”

Give us your overall sense of whether that would be an accurate characterization of the issues at stake here.

JOHN RATCLIFFE, FORMER DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE: Well, even if that’s true and that may be that there are sources in there that they don’t want divulged, or national security information that they don’t want there. But it’s garbage to say that that information couldn’t be redacted so that the remainder of the affidavit that is so important to establishing probable cause is something that we can see.

Laura, this is unfortunately just like the Russia Gate playbook used by the FBI in the Department of Justice, where they’re using their authorities both as a sword and a shield. And we had a warrant in this case that was so overbroad, and they used it as a sword. It literally allowed the FBI. We are talking about how they were able to get passports and things.

It literally allowed the FBI lawfully, because it was signed off, together every government document and presidential record from President Trump’s first day as president through his last day as president. That was a four- year some would call it a fishing expedition, I would call it a hunting license.

Now they’ve turned around and said, after I heard President Trump very clearly say, that he was in favor of releasing the underlying affidavit and calling Merrick Garland’s bluff. They’re saying, Oh, no, now we’ve got to preserve the sanctity of 6(e) in grand jury, and this is far too sensitive.

It’s far too sensitive. Although at the same time, they’re leaking information to the Washington Post that it’s about nuclear weapon technology. So unfortunately, we’re seeing the same thing that what had happened in Russia. Yes, it’s a pattern.

INGRAHAM: Now, Congressman, you petitioned for a congressional closed session review for Republicans on the Judiciary Committee of that affidavit.

REP. JIM JORDAN (R-OH): Well, we want them to preserve all documents. We sent a letter today signed by every Republican member of the committee. We want them to preserve all the information so we can some point see this and know exactly what took place here.

But I think you’re right. The right term is the pattern. Here’s the interesting pattern, Laura. You mentioned the Mueller investigation. Go back to 2019, July of 2019, Bob Mueller testifies in front of our committee, falls flat. Everyone realizes this Russia thing was a complete hoax.

What happens the very next day? That’s when they launched their impeachment probe of President Trump, because that’s when he had the phone call with President Zelenskyy. Same thing is happening now.

The January 6 committee is falling flat. I think tomorrow the voters in Wyoming are going to send a message and it’d be a referendum on that committee. And what do they do? So they see that happening? They go raid the president’s home. So this is the pattern.

These guys are never going to turn down the heat. They should. It’s bad for the country, but they’re never going to because they’ve been doing it for six years before he was in office, while he was in office, now that he’s out of office. So that is the pattern that and that’s what the American people are so fed up with.

INGRAHAM: And yet, it’s always trust the process, you’re inveighing against the dedicated civil servants army. And the Journal is reporting tonight, that Merrick Garland weighed the search of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago for weeks.

Well, first of all, that’s a leak, right. Harmeet, that’s another leak. I took it really seriously. But apparently, the nuclear codes might be involved. Come on.

HARMEET DHILLON, CEO, CENTER FOR AMERICAN LIBERTY: This is even more disturbing, Laura. I mean, I was willing to accept that perhaps there was a mole in the White House – not in the White House, but at Mar-a-Lago who gave some information about something urgent. And that was the excuse that Merrick Garland used to overrule his better impulses about what to do with the former president’s residence.

But in fact, the fact that he’d been debating it for weeks, again, undercuts the urgency undercuts the need to have done this at all, and really calls into question not only his judgment, but all the people advising him to do this.

And so, what they’re trying to hide, Laura, I mean, it’s pretty typical. It’s typical that the government does not want to release its underlying affidavits, because, indeed, it does show what they’re going after. But in this case, it is a matter of public interest. And as your prior guest mentioned, it is not just a judicial watch.

It’s actually almost a dozen news organizations and nonprofits that are asking for this, so the public interest demands that this extraordinary situation. It’s – the raid be documented and why it was done. And so, by hiding it, the DOJ is really concealing what they are really doing here and it’s not law enforcement, Laura. It’s something else.

INGRAHAM: Now, Adam Schiff, apparently, Mr. Ratcliffe, was asked about the timing of the raid. Watch.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Why did Justice Department officials wait 18 months after the end of the Trump presidency? What changed that made this immediate?

REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D-CA): I don’t know. But if the Trump people represented that they provided all the classified, or national security information and didn’t, that’s a serious problem.


INGRAHAM: But, John, it was more than 500 days since Trump left office, and I guess only 100 days until the midterms. So what do you make of Schiff’s claim there?

RATCLIFFE: Well, it’s like everything Adam Schiff says, it’s false and disingenuous. If this was sensitive national security information, the Department of Justice and FBI had every right to go get it back, if it wasn’t yet declassified. But no one believes that this was the least intrusive method of doing it.

This is very clearly political. I think everyone can see that. And Adam Schiff is the person, when we talk about the Russia hoax, who had evidence of Russian collusion that we never saw. The person who said the FBI couldn’t possibly lie to the FISA court is not even possible and created a memo saying that, is the person who lied about meeting the Ukraine impeachment whistleblower, when in fact he had.

He’s the one who said that, Hunter Biden’s laptop was Russian disinformation. It’s one lie after another. And it’s frankly, one of the reasons that, hopefully, come January, he will not only be the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, he won’t be on the House Intelligence Committee.

INGRAHAM: Well, Congressman Jordan, Ken Dilanian, today on, I guess, it was on MSNBC, made a comment about the types of documents that were part of this affidavit and that were sealed. It was yesterday, excuse me, but they’re really taking this up a notch to the top spy level. Watch.


KEN DILANIAN, NBC NEWS JUSTICE AND INTELLIGENCE CORRESPONDENT: The FBI sees five sets of documents marked top secret. But among that was one set marked top secret sensitive compartmented information. That means information that’s so secret, only a small group of people inside the U.S. government can see it.

We’re talking about things like CIA – names of CIA sources in Moscow, or images from the most advanced spy satellites.


INGRAHAM: Well, Congressman, I don’t think he knows that that’s – but you hear how he is saying, images like spy satellites, images like Moscow sources. He doesn’t know, I don’t think, that that was in the documents. But this is all meant to know – to try to paint this picture of some James Bond kind of situation here.

JORDAN: Yes. And even if it was, why’d you wait 18 months? I mean, come on. Nothing makes sense here. We know this was unprecedented, unwarranted. It was just plain wrong. And I think when you couple it with – think about last week.

In a five day time period, we had the President’s personal residence raided. We had the phone of the sitting member of Congress taken, and we had 87,000 IRS agents unleashed on the American people. And then you think about, oh, this was so sensitive. We waited 18 months to get it.

No one believes these folks. But they see their government being turned against us, we the people, we the citizens, and that’s the frightening part. So when President Trump says, Turn down the heat for goodness sake, they should, because turning down the heat means following the constitution. That’s the concern here.

INGRAHAM: Panel, thank you. Great to see all of you tonight.

All right. Up next, my ‘Angle’ a little later in the show. But up next, the Biden spin machine is totally breaking down before our eyes. Now failure is success. That’s all you need to know. Coming up next.


INGRAHAM: The Joe-mentum illusion. That’s the focus of tonight’s ‘Angle’.

All right. Today, it became official. Politico is to the Biden administration what Pravda was for Soviet Russia.

Today in their morning playbook, they played Biden propagandists. “After months of bad news, Biden’s presidency has reached an undeniable pivot point with the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act. It also reflects a sense of vindication among the White House aides about their theory of the case that a focus on delivering concrete results for Americans, ignoring the conventional wisdom and staying out of the needless fights would ultimately pay off politically.”

Now, with that writing, who needs a White House press secretary? That’s what I’m saying. Now, of course, they were simply following the lead of the TV propagandists who have been desperate to have something, anything to point to, to try to prop up this haggard, heaving hologram presidency.

Now people who build themselves as straight up reporters end up just repeating whatever’s in the White House briefing book. No questions asked.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The White House looking to turn President Biden’s winning streak into midterm momentum.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Halts in inflation, gas price is below $4 a gallon. He’s at a big legislative win.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They have a pretty good laundry list of bread and butter issues in terms of a package that they can sell to voters. It’s pretty good.


INGRAHAM: Now, what qualifies as pretty good to them, well, isn’t inflation supposed to actually help the legislation is supposed to help the average person? Isn’t that the test here? Not whether Biden gets climate and tax legislation just passed on a purely partisan vote. That’s not really the measure, is it?

And what if Biden’s signature legislation is based in large part on lies? Like, the lie that the 87,000 IRS agents won’t target people who make less than $400,000 a year. Well, “The IRS will collect billions of dollars from auditing low and middle-income Americans under the White House-backed Inflation Reduction Act”.

“The CBO informed congressional Republicans that under the Act audits of taxpayers making under 400,000 will account for about $20 billion in additional revenue contradicting the Biden administration claims.”

Oops, claims? You mean, these claims?


KARINE JEAN-PIERRE, WHITE HOUSE DEPUTY PRESS SECRETARY: Audit rates will not rise relative to recent years for households making under $400,000.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Resources will not add to audits for households under $400,000.


INGRAHAM: So since they’ve decided that they won’t change their policies, you see what they’re doing, right? They’re just – they keep digging in. And since the regime press is what it is, there’s no competition for scoops about the administration. Gone are the investigative journalists altogether. They only compete in categories, like most obsequious.


MIKA BRZEZINSKI, MSNBC HOST: He has been underestimated every step of the way in his career. And here we go again.

JOE SCARBOROUGH, MSNBC HOST: We have a massive economy. Democrats can talk about plummeting gas prices, massive job numbers. Thank you for the billboard here.

BRZEZINSKI: It’s quite a list.

SCARBOROUGH: Yes, it is. It’s a massive list. But–


INGRAHAM: Zero analysis. Essentially just – they’re just in all of a graphic. Now, what they failed to note is that most, Americans 62 percent, are now worried about being able to afford housing in the next year. And gas prices fell a little bit, well, break out the champagne, still almost double at what it was when Trump left office.

These people need to, I think, at some point just get out more, especially if they’re actually mesmerized by the chap who last week sounded and looked like this.


JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: It’s the most consequential thing that Congress can do to keep our progress from – on inflation from getting better – from getting worse.

Representatives to (inaudible) our boss. I’m proud to name Dr. Monica (inaudible) going to get it right, doc. (inaudible)


INGRAHAM: Well, wish she wasn’t sniffing her hair at that point. The fact of the matter is, in only two years, Biden has driven our country into a ditch. And it somewhat feels like two years.

Unless you like spending more and getting less, unless you like wage increases, they are not even keeping up with inflation. And unless you like soaring crime, or the fact that Biden turned America into a dumping ground for the drug cartels, today Bill Melugin’s report on this from Eagle Pass was so disturbing.


BILL MELUGIN, FOX NEWS NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Just in the last 24 hours alone, we have had more than 2000 illegal crossings in the Del Rio sector here. That’s one single sector in one day, predominately single adults. We are no longer seeing a bunch of little kids or those family units like we saw last summer. There have now been 401,000 illegal crossings just here in the Del Rio sector since October 1st.


INGRAHAM: It’s a shameless invasion of our country. And, oh, by the way, the mesmerizing Biden, let’s talk about the snapshot of our GDP under Biden versus the rest of the G7, what it tells us about the tale of Biden versus Trump on the economy. Check this out. Back in 2019, this is where we were. We were number one at a GDP at 2.3 percent. Then in 2020 we were obviously down, right, because minus 3.4 percent because of COVID, but still, we were number one by a long shot. This was only because Donald Trump bucked the Democrats and the press and decided to open back up when other countries stayed in lockdown.

But now under Biden’s policies, look at where we are. We’ve fallen from number one under Trump to number four under Biden. France and Italy beat us in 2021. That is pathetic.

And what everyone tonight needs to understand is this — that result, that GDP result, is what the Democrats want. When America’s number one, the left is miserable. When we had energy independence and cheap gas, they were furious. When there was no inflation with rising wages, they were depressed. When people stand for and sing the National Anthem, they’re offended.

President Trump’s policies were unabashedly pro-American, and they were successful, and for that they wanted to drive him out of office. They relied on fabricated evidence, unsupported innuendo, and partisan investigations to impeach him and harass his family, and they’re still doing it. Raids, withheld affidavits, anonymous sources, apparatchiks burrowed in “The Times” and “The Washington Post.” And now the same Democrat operatives masquerading as journalists are doing the same thing they’ve always done. They try to sell Democrat failures as wins. But Americans aren’t buying it.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh, I don’t think there’s a grade low enough to give him. The bottom grade.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Horrible. Worst president ever.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I’m a retired teacher. F, F, F.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Not good. Probably a three out of 10.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I’m a Democrat, and I think we need a younger person, some new change.


INGRAHAM: The last guy was a Democrat.

We haven’t even talked about Biden’s nightmare foreign policy, 13 service personnel dead in the Afghanistan pullout a year ago, China on the cusp of invading Taiwan, a proxy war against Russia that’s going south in Ukraine, billions of dollars in un-trackable munitions that we sent over there. At least the defense contractors are happy, though, right?

Biden is at 40.2 percent approval according to website FiveThirtyEight. Look at where he stands versus Trump and Obama. Now, imagine where he would be if he had a press that was even objective half the time. In fact, you have to go back to Jimmy Carter to hit approval numbers lower than Biden’s today at the same point in his presidency. So only in liberal la-la land would any of this qualify as Joe-mentum.

And that’s the Angle.

Coming up, “The Atlantic” equates praying the rosary with extremism. And the Democratic candidate for governor in Pennsylvania awkwardly kind of returns to the trail? Raymond Arroyo has it all, “Seen and Unseen” is next.


INGRAHAM: It’s time for “Seen and Unseen” where we explore the stories behind the headlines. And for that we turn to FOX News contributor Raymond Arroyo. All right, Raymond, let us start with this piece in “The Atlantic” where the writer is attempting to villainize those who pray the rosary. I’ve heard it all.

RAYMOND ARROYO, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Laura, Daniel Panneton penned a piece titled “How the rosary became an extremist symbol.” Stay with me. The Atlantic later altered the title, but it reads this way, “The battle beads culture of spiritual warfare permits radical traditional Catholics literally to demonize their political opponents and regard the use of armed force against them as sanctified. The sacramental rosary isn’t just a spiritual weapon, but one that comes with physical ammunition.”

Laura, are Catholics out straggling people with rosary beads or are they loading rosary beads into canons and firing them on pagans? I don’t think so. I couldn’t find one case where either thing happened. Not once.

INGRAHAM: Well, Raymond, just because of that article, you sent it to me, or I sent it to you last night, I had the kids — we did all five decades of the rosary last night, and I think it’s been quite a while since I’ve done that. So what I’m saying is, I’m looking at the glass half full. Because they’ve demonized the rosary, I thought that must be something I should be doing more of.

ARROYO: You’re right, it is a spiritual weapon to combat the devil.


ARROYO: And look, Christians have been praying this for centuries. And it’s just a scriptural recitation and meditation, very structured, using “Our Father,” “Hail Marys.” But here’s the point. This writer is obviously filled with some kind of religious animus and he is really afraid of faith, because it was praying the rosary that brought down the iron curtain in Poland, ended Roe v wade, and maybe that’s what’s got him so scared.

But here’s the bewildering thing to me. “The Atlantic” is demonizing Catholics for praying the rosary while we have a high profile stabbing of renowned author Salman Rushdie which increasing appears to be religiously motivated, and everyone is suddenly, utterly confused.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: While we wait to hopefully hear an update about his condition, the other big question is a possible motive.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It’s chilling, it’s intimidating, and it’s terror. We don’t know the motive.



ARROYO: What could the motive be, Laura? What could have provoked a suspect, Hadi Matar, to stab Salman Rushdie? Matar’s own mother, by the way, says he was a Shiite and is a Shiite. And after spending a month in Lebanon became very moody and more religious. Might the Fatwa the Iranian government pronounced on Rushdie have been a contributing factor?

INGRAHAM: I mean, a spokesman for the Iranian foreign ministry who says Rushdie brought the attack upon himself.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): In this regard, no one can blame the Islamic Republic of Iran. We believe that the insults made and the support he received was an insult against followers of all religions.


INGRAHAM: So justifying the fatwa, Raymond. He justified it. Is that confusing to “The Atlantic”?

ARROYO: I guess not. But they won’t touch this with a 10-foot blade.

And here’s the problem. You’ve got Middle Eastern intelligence officers saying that this suspect had contact with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. So there’s real facts to report here, and everybody’s looking the other way scratching their heads. If you’re looking for religious driven extremism, you don’t have to look very far.

Meanwhile, in Pennsylvania, Laura, Democratic candidate for Senate, John Fetterman returned to the campaign trail three months after suffering a stroke. His return was a little less than fluid.


LT. GOV. JOHN FETTERMAN, (D) PENNSYLVANIA SENATE CANDIDATE: Twenty-five of those counties more votes, 25 — 50, there’s 54 red counties, more votes, more votes than Dr. Oz in those counties as well, too.

Who would ever think that I would be the normal, the normal one in the race here.


FETTERMAN: I gave away — I gave away the lieutenant governor governor in Pennsylvania, the only lieutenant governor in the history to do that.

You can count on us to eliminate the filibuster —


FETTERMAN: — eliminate the filibuster, and let’s, let’s get some stuff done for America.

If you come out and step with us, we will be able to stand with you in D.C.


ARROYO: Poor guy. Look, he suffered a stroke, he’s back on the trail. But after Joe Biden, John Fetterman looks like Churchill. But he’s obviously struggling with syntax, Laura. And you might say even his supporters told ABC News they found him wandering. One of them said he lacked energy. He should focus on his health here. For the good of the party, for the good of his reputation, maybe it’s time to step away from the trail rather than lean into it.

INGRAHAM: The whole costume with the hoodie and the sweatpants, I mean, the whole — it’s just not serious. I’m sorry.

ARROYO: You don’t like the Uncle Fester garb? That didn’t do it for you?

INGRAHAM: Were you the one that came up with Uncle Festerman? That’s such an easy joke. But I don’t like the hoodie. OK, if you’re 13 and you’re going to practice, that’s fine. But a grown man, we don’t need the hoodie. Thank you very much. That’s aside from the fact that nothing he said will make the lives of Pennsylvanians any better. The policies are what matter. But none of this. Oz is going to close this gap, and the people of Pennsylvania can do a lot better. Raymond, thank you. Great to see you tonight.

And CNN, MSNBC, and FOX right now all agree on one thing — Liz Cheney is about to get thumped. Her challenger in tomorrow’s GOP primary joins me next. Stay there.



UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But I am told her speech tomorrow evening, if she does fall short, is going to offer a roadmap for the next steps for Liz Cheney. This is definitely not the end of her career if she falls short tomorrow, but the beginning of a very new chapter.


INGRAHAM: Beginning? Never has a candidate so rejected by her own party been so elevated by the press. Liz Cheney is going to get trounced, and early polls it looks like it could be by as much as 30 points. So it’s near certain defeat in tomorrow’s Wyoming GOP House primary to my next guest, challenger Harriet Hageman. We don’t want to count our chickens before they hatch, but Harriet, what over the next 24 hours will America have learned about what type of Republican Party the voters really want in America?

HARRIET HAGEMAN, (R) LIZ CHENEY CHALLENGER: Well, it’s an extremely important race for that very reason. Where is the Republican Party going to go? Are we going to be an America first Republican Party that fights for the —

INGRAHAM: All right, well, we’re going to get Harriet back, I think.

But what they’re relying on in Wyoming, of course, is, they hope, some type of magical massive Democrat turnout. They think if they can get enough Democrats to turn out, cross over, because you’re allowed to do that in the primary there, that somehow they’ll be able to pull Liz Cheney across the finish line. But this is just ridiculous.

But, again, Liz Cheney wants Trump out. She stands against Donald Trump. This is what her mission is. That’s been her mission for the last two years. And that’s why the press likes her. Five minutes ago, it seems at least, that the Cheneys were the ultimate bad guys for the press. For years they called her father essentially a war criminal. I defended him. Now they’re embracing Liz Cheney as the future of the Republican Party and Republicans are supposed to like flagellate themselves for rejecting her? CNN has laid out the way Cheney could pull out that victory.


JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Really the only chance she has, her aides acknowledge, is if enough Democrats and independents switch parties, which they can do here in Wyoming, and support her in the primary.


INGRAHAM: They’re wishing it Harriet, wish cast. Are there enough democrat voters to come out and somehow deliver this mythical victory?

HAGEMAN: Well, there aren’t. But in addition to which, the independents are breaking my way as well. So even those folks who do change parties to vote necessity the primary, polls show they support me over Liz Cheney. So there aren’t enough Democrats. But it is pretty ironic, isn’t it, that she is seeking the support of the Democrat Party just like she’s only working with the Democrats back in Washington, D.C.

INGRAHAM: But the problem is, Harriet, I literally never hear her talking about the issues that matter to conservatives. I mean, like a passing reference to the Dobbs decision, of course striking down Roe v wade, just a passing reference. Nothing that I’ve heard on the climate change legislation. She is obsessed with Donald Trump, obsessed. I’ve never seen anything like it.

HAGEMAN: And that’s what’s so sad for the state of Wyoming. We only have one representative in Congress. And we need to make it count, and she’s completely AWOL because she’s focusing on something that is not important to the citizens of Wyoming. I’ve traveled close to 40,000 miles now in Wyoming since I started this, and there are three issues that the voters are concerned with — inflation, protection of our energy jobs, and the open border. Liz Cheney doesn’t talk about any of those because she knows that her new Democrat friends would not like her attacking Joe Biden, so she’s just gone silent. She’s completely rogue. She does not represent then Republican Party in Wyoming —

INGRAHAM: Harriet, you can look forward to her being on CNN or MSNBC attacking you after you’re elected to Congress. Harriet, great to see you. Good luck tomorrow. We’ll check back with you soon.

And just how confident are the Democrats that their Inflation Reduction Act is actually going to reduce inflation? Well, not much. The Last Bite will reveal it.


INGRAHAM: It was easy for Congressman Jamie Raskin to brag in general about the Democrats’ so-called Inflation Reduction Act until he was asked for specifics.


REP. JAMIE RASKIN, (D-MD) JANUARY 6TH SELECT COMMITTEE: As soon as the act goes into effect, I know that those who have been blaming President Biden for inflation going up are now giving President Biden all the credit for inflation going down. So we’re moving things in the right direction already.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And what parts of the bill do you think will quickly work on that specifically?

RASKIN: Next question.


INGRAHAM: Next question. I love that. Can he buy a vowel? Inspiring a lot of confidence.

That’s it for us tonight. Remember, it’s America now and forever. And “GUTFELD!” next.

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.

Source URL: https://www.foxnews.com/transcript/the-ingraham-angle-dojs-lack-transparency-trump-raid

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

%d bloggers like this: