clinton is what made me vote for trump. >> sean: call the hannity hotline. amazon.com, walmart everywhere, let there be light. i think you will enjoy it. let not your heart be troubled, there she is. thank you for joining us by the way. what it was like to be a guest. i used to be on with you a couple of times a week. >> sean: i had the same experience, i was on one day on fox and friends this week. i forgot what it was like to be a guest. >> laura: hard break here. wrap, wrap, wrap. great show, i love sara carter, incredible reporting. you have a good rest of the night. from w., great to be home, this is the ingraham angle. so much news. every night i say. that it's not hype. there are so many big stories. foreign policy, staffing at the white house, what they're doing with your tax dollars on capitol hill. and, yes, the huge shakium at the top of the president's national security team.

general h.r. mcmaster is out and john bolton is in. president trump loses a lawyer who doesn't want him to talk to the special counsel, allen dershowitz tells us if trump is walking into a tramp. plus, we'll show you stunning surveillance video of the las vegas shooter. we have been waiting for this. experts tell us what they see which we may not notice. "you tube" launching a chilling new salvo in the war on free speech. this time, targeting guns and gun owners. first, how the gop walled off trump, that's the focus of tonight's angle. now, what are these people why are they smiling about the $1.3 trillion package passed by the house today? chuck schumer, 134r5i7b your joy. >> this spending agreement brings the era of us aterity to

an unceremonious end. we democrats are happy with what we're able to accomplish on a number of priorities, the democrats have fought for all along. >> laura: democrats are thrilled because they're about to secure runaway spending that was out of reach even under obama. discretionary spending is skyrocketing. no more budget caps for this gang. meanwhile, republicans are tripping all over themselves. have youstein this? trying to justify this boondoggle. i realize they're up against, as usual, government shutdown, but the largest military expenditure in 14 years, and an explosion in discretionary spending is not going to pave the way to victory in november. by the way, if you're going to increase military funding this much, how about even the pretenls of something to offset some of that with spending cuts. once a fiscal hawk when in

congress, budget director mick mulvaney tried to sell this rosin piece of fish. >> we've talked for the last, i don't know, three, four, five, six months about trying to get the president's priorities funded. and this omnibus bill does that. when you look at the bill, we have to weigh what we asked for and what we had to give away to get it. is it perfect no. is it exactly what we asked for, no. were we ever going on get that, no. that's not how the process works. >> laura: thanks for the tutorial. when you american people have given you both houses of congress, and the white house, wla you what you said you needed, it should be the way the process works director mulvaney. the gop just cannot get its act together. the most important thing that president promised is number one priority, was getting that border wall built. did that get lost on the people in congress? did they not catch the hundreds

of times he mentioned it and during the rallies? he asked congress for 1.6 billion to build 74 miles of concrete wall. this omnibus orrie of spending dedicates a puny $641 million to something called border reinforcement. speaker paul ryan says don't worry about it. >> we fund government one year at a time. how the budget process works. we're going to fund the one wall year at a time, for the next six months. you need fences, cameras, need e aerial devices to be able to place it in the mountainous areas, can't build a wall, need cameras and drones up there. it's border wall system. different kiempbdz of wall based on conditions on the ground. that's what we fund. >> laura: that is just washington speak. sensors, fencing, iphones,

drones? this isn't what the president promised. he vowed to build a wall. it is not complicated. now we have the biggest spebdzing bill in history, and it sets aside $640 million to supposedly fund wall construction for one year? my friends, i hate to say this, but as i see it, right now, tonight, the wall is never going to happen. as we've dug into this and really looked into this, this bill doesn't fund the wall at all. in fact the bill only pays for construction, i can't believe i'm saying this, of see-through fencing. congress actually authorized, remember this, back in 2006. the omnibus bill funds 33 miles of new barriers, and replacement fencing, for 59 miles. but understand this, there is no wall construction. all told, you the taxpayer, will

refence part of the border for a grand total of, wait for it, 92 miles. you know what that looks like? its looks like this. 92 miles. you see that white spot? we should have made it pink. that white spot, look how big the border is. why bother at all? put the big welcome mat at the border, doesn't matter. if the republicans lose the mid-terms, the democrats will never fund this thing and will be reliant on paul rye ant's sensors and a few drones and replacement fencing to protect america. i will repeat, this is not what the american people voted for. you know what really gets me? it's an embarrassment to the president. he knew how to win this election. the republicans in the swamp want to take it away from him. last week he was at the border

inspecting wall prototypes when he said this. >> president trump: the fence, it is a very powerful fence, not doing the trick. they cut holes in it. then they're patching homes all the time. you have hundreds of holes cut in and pamped. so the fence is not strong enough, not the right idea. but for those people, if you don't have a wall system, we're not going to have a country. >> laura: okay, i agree with him, it can't be fences that are repaired intermittently with holes in them. you don't have a wall, don't have a country. today there was a meeting of millenials at the white house, pretty cool. and it is great to hear their concerns on a variety of topics. but how about the concern that the government, this type of omnibus spending bill, is mortgaging away their future? the money that's being spent and borrowed and printed. this is congressman dave brat. >> everyone is concerned about the kids.

but they're not. we're putting all this on the kids credit card. inter-generational theft, it's immoral, unethical, we have to make a change. >> laura: we are saddling the next generation with ever-growing debt. and for what? if we truly cared about the my len yals we would firstly keep them sach by immediately funding the border wall to keep them safe. then find real cuts throughout the federal budge don't offset these radical expenditures so they wouldn't be stuck after the military hardware and the flimsy fence we're buying have all rusted away. we can do better, we must do better, or republicans do not deserve to be in the majority. and that's the angle. joining us for reaction, is south carolina republican congressman wall of norman who joins us from charlotte. and here in washington, is richard goodstein, smiling like

theca cat who ate the canary, attorney, democratic strategist. congressman, you have the house, you have the senate, and you got the white house, and now we have spend-o-rama which i imagine barack obama must be watch something where comfortably and think ig got to hand it to you, you guys can do it better than i can. you can spend that money better than i can. what's going on, congressman? >> well, laura, what did you say, dead fish? that's what i think this spending bill is, the omnibus. you know, it's really an insult to get a 2,200 page document and get 16 hours to read it. i have to read 137 pages an hour, and digest it. and now, we ee on a two-week vacation, really? the system is broken. we have gotten the 1 appropriations over, back in

september, the 12 appropriations. we have to make a change. i'm tired of it. and i, allow with a lot of other members, i'm a member of the freedom caucus, voted against the rule today, we simply were not elected to bankrupt this country. as congressman brat said, you know, we are saddling our children with debt. you do the math, every taxpayer, a little under $200,000. >> laura: stunning. >> it's sad. >> laura: i have to play this sound bite for you. nancy pelosi, who also seems very happy, she had an extra spring in her step today, said this, let's watch. >> it's interesting to see from the standpoint of regular order why the republicans thought that that would be a good idea. well, i think one of the reasons they rushed it through, posting it last night, taking it on the floor today, not honoring the three-day rule, they didn't want their colleagues to see what was in the bill. >> laura: well, she's famously

said you have to pass it to see what's in it. 2,000 plus pages. we stacked it up last night, guys, no one is reading this bill, face it, you vote on it, get the heck out of town. the senate looks like it's going on vote on it tonight, they see the writing on the wall. richard goodstein, look, i'm embarrassed tonight as a republican. and that might not sell on tv and maybe other networks going to do all sex all the time, higher ratings, but i find this to be really important. we doechblt the money for the spending, republicans campaigned on this and democrats, if i'm you, i'm sitting back and going what do we have to do now, good stuff. >> i feel your pain, seriously. i know where you've been and where sean and others have been on deficit spending. at least when barack obama was running up trillion dollar deficits we had the great recess to recover from. everybody is boasting about how great this economy is. and to run trillion dollar deficits in the face of that? really is not right. and you talk with sean earlier about sticking to promises. whether it's the border wall or

balancing the budget or bringing jobs back, yeah, as you put it, konld donald trump knew how to win it lex. he said things that everybody who knew policy knew he koornlt deliver on. >> laura: i don't agree with you. you can build a wall. we can put a man on the moon, we can do all of the innovation technology, i think america could solve pretty much any big problem ahead of it. if it wants to. but in washington, richard, it's both republicans and democrats, i'm not letting democrats off the hook, they're big spenders, too. they just want to keep it going. the lobbyists get paid, the lawyers get the money. i'm former lawyer, believe me, it's nice to charge $700 an hour. the american people demand real accountability. what bang are we getting for the buck, is it going to make the millenials safer and prosperous and happier? congressman chime, in but the democrats didn't get everything they want, republicans, no one gets everything they want, i'm

not going to come here tonight saying the president was going to get everything. it seems to me he has an opportunity, or had an opportunity, to go to the american people and say i campaigned on this, i think this is critical for the future of the country, if the government has to shut down because both parties don't want to protect our country that's sad. maybe we need to have a conversation about that. i think he had to do that. >> well, you got to, you can't let this process continue with the threat of a shutdown. i was perfectly willing to have a shutdown. and sit up in washington, d.c. for six months or as long as it takes to not have the giveaway programs we have had. the democrats are a huge part of this. look, if you look at the vote today, on the rule, which all the rule was is allowing the budget to be voted on, it barely passed 211-207, and 182

democrats. >> laura: you neededted democrats, they don't have enough republicans, they needed the democrat votes. why wouldn't they support this? they're going to support it. we have to get to bolton. this is huge news, i'm sorry. john bolton is replacing h.r. mcmaster today, and my goodness, msnbc and others are in a total meltdown, world war 3 is about to happen. >> john bolton is known as a hard liner. clearly different than others in the administration now, on the iran agreement for example. and it points to dangerous signals. >> millions of voters voted against in 2016, voted against stupid wars and bringing the biggest hawk there's ever been and put him as head of national security is awful. >> john bolton, he is the hammer and everything is a nail. >> laura: i love that phrase. come on, richard, the idea that bolton is going to order trump

around, you're going to war in country x, i don't think so. trump is not a military interventionist, even dp bolton is nor of a neo-- >> but he's impressionable, the. is. the explanation, mcmaster was more fond of the iran deal and therefore trump had to get rid of him. but the point is, we knew where he was, the iran deal, i hired this guy this didn't agree with me. why didn't you ask when you hired him? john bolton is more interventionist. and at the same time that the president is thumping his dhesht about meeting with kim jong-un, doing away with the north korean nuclear threat f we rip up the iran deal within months, we don't know how many, iran is going to be a nuclear threat. that's a tinder box. >> laura: congressman, i think bolton, he has experience at the u.n., he knows the swamp, doesn't agree with the president. the president likes to have

differing views on his staff, still, i think. your reaction to another shakeup? >> it is a great hire. we have had bolton in meetings on capitol hill, knowledgeable, straight forward. he will not agree with this president if he really doesn't think it is in the west interests of the country. one thing about president trump, he encourages that. he's going to be the one to make the final decision. but john bomb ton, i have the highest respect for. john bolton. we have not interviewed anybody in the meetings that i have had where he hasn't answered every question. he sat for an hour and a half to two talking about foreign policy. that's his bailey wick. what he likes. i applaud the president. in the press, msnbc when have you heard them compliment this president? >> laura: never, he could cure lung cancer and they'd say why didn't you do it two weeks ago. a question for you all, did president trump just lose a lawyer who might actually save him from himself in the russia investigation?

that's kind of wild. dershowitz weighs in next. poor mouth breather. allergies? stuffy nose? can't sleep? take that. a breathe right nasal strip instantly opens your nose up to 38% more than allergy medicine alone. shut your mouth and say goodnight, mouthbreathers. breathe right. and taking cared abof the boys.e zach! talk to me. it's for the house. i got a job.

it's okay. dad took care of us. he gets the best deal on the perfect hotel by using. tripadvisor! that's because tripadvisor lets you start your trip on the right foot... by comparing prices from over 200 booking sites to find the right hotel for you at the lowest price. saving you up to 30%! you'll be bathing in savings! tripadvisor. check the latest reviews and lowest prices.

you know what's not awesome? gig-speed internet. when only certain people can get it. let's fix that. let's give this guy gig- really? and these kids, and these guys, him, ah. oh hello. that lady, these houses! yes, yes and yes. and don't forget about them. uh huh, sure. still yes! xfinity delivers gig speed to more homes than anyone. now you can get it, too. welcome to the party. >> laura: very big shakeup on president trump's legal need, lead attorney john dowd resigned. trump reportedly was displeased

when the attorney called on the justice department to end the special counsel's investigation. another conflict was exposed when trump said that he favored what dowd had opposed. >> mr. president, would you like to testify to the special counsel robert mueller. >> thank you. >> you would? >> president trump: i would like to. >> laura: i would like to. as in talk to the special counsel. is the president walking into a trap? harvard law profess or allen de sha witnesses, and in san francisco, attorney ha harmony dillon. great to see both of you. professor dershowitz and harmit, it sends a chill down by spine and up my spine as a former defense attorney to hear how the president wants to go in and talk to mueller.

professor dershowitz, what are the pitfalls? >> what i couldn't believe is what i heard on television shows, he actually offered a job to be his lawyer to bob bennett. bob bennett. i wonder if anybody told him, was the lawyer who got bill clinton impeached. bob bennett was the lawyer who told bill clinton it's okay, you can testify at a deposition about your sex loif. that's what got him -- sex loif. that got him impeached. he could have settled for $750,000. i called it the greatest lef blunder of the -- greatest legal blunder of the 20th century. bob ben the was offered a job to come and become trump's lawyer? i don't know what's going on in that white house. he of course should not testify unless he absolutely has to. and if he has to, it should be under the most rigorous restrictions of time, and type of question, and he should be prepared to answer yes, no, i

don't recall instead of giving long, long answers. because the one thing they're trying to get him on, is perjury. and there's no defense against that. perjury is one of those specified in the constitution for impeachment. that's the one issue that has to be avoided at all costs. >> laura: full dills closure, i worked for bob bennett imyears ago, not on that case. harmit, the big swirling controversy, oh no lawyer wants to work for donald trump. first of all, a lot of law firms, big law firms, don't like getting involved in these political matterstor a variety of reasons, everything is toxic. but this this is what the former acting solicitor general for obama said today. >> i represented bin laden's driver. but i would have trouble representing donald trump. the reason for that is very simple, which is, you know, the guy doesn't believe in the rule of law.

>> laura: that's coming from the obama administration with the way they handled the hillary e-mail investigation, so forth. harmit your reaction, what about written answers to questions, what about this narrow area in which donald trump would answer questions, could that be acceptable or is that as professor dershowitz says, perjury trap. >> it's less of a perjury trap if the president answers written questions. but it causes its own problems. i don't think the. of the united states, whether it's donald trump, bill clinton, should be answer questionings like this from a special counsel unless there is clear evidence of a crime. also a showing that he's the only person that can answer those questions. absent that, this is a perjury trap. it troubles he as a supporter of the president he wants to talk to special counsel under these circumstances. it is a perjury trap. and i think one of the frustrations here of his lawyers and other lawyers is that maybe the president isn't following the sound advice of some of his

lawyers, which is a serious problem. a lot of lawyers would have a problem with a client who isn't following good advice. >> laura: professor dershowitz, that's a big issue. donald trump is a strong personality, he has been his own advisor and been pretty successful. when people said no he said yes. and he usually wins. but the law is a very different deal. so you can talk about that, managing a client that doesn't want to listen. >> it's very, very difficult, of course. i love what the former solicitor general said, he wouldn't represent donald trump, he doesn't believe in the rule of law. but he represented bin laden's droifer. none -- driver. none of these, criminals don't generally believe in the rule of law if that was are the basis for not representing somebody, all of us criminal lawyers would be out of business. that's a phony argument. the better argument is that it's hard to represent a client who doesn't listen to you, doesn't take your advice. i think the president is doing something very strategic by the way.

he has good cop-bad cop. he has the good cops trying to make a deal with the special counsel to limit his exposure to limit the kinds of questions. but then he's also preparing bad cops. joe digenova, can get on television, go to court, litigate i don't think it's a bad strategy. the problem is dowd didn't want to be caught in the middle of that. he wanted to be in control of the strategy, only play good cop. >> laura, i was going to say, i agree with allen. but you can't be good cop and the bad cop. dowd had the situation last week he was calling on the white house, special counsel to limit his investigation. you can't be that same person who's negotiating the terms of the interview of the president. so he can't have it both ways. >> laura: i think also -- >> i agree. >> laura: i think, guys, we're running out of time, but you also have to bring in people who are not sometimes, in their late 70s, early 80s.

not to be ageist -- >> hey! [laughing] >> laura: other than you, dersh. but it's important to bring in people who are, you know, in the prime, have experience, so forth. i know he's interviewed emmett flood, old clerk of mine, phenomenal. you can put together a team that has senior statesmen, lawyers, you can have a little bit younger. and bring that in. >> you left out one group. >> laura: what? >> you left out one group. he must include women. women on his defense team. >> laura: 100%. >> you need to have women on the defense team. >> laura: we're smarter. >> young people, people of color, people who are women, people from every background. you don't know what you're going to get when you have a jury, don't know what judge you are going to pull, you must be prepared for every eventuality. look, we know that they put the case in the district of columbia because they wanted a particular

kind of jury rather than the virginia jury. both sides have to be able to play that game. get the maximum advantage out of the differences in jurors -- >> laura: we're going to be going after this -- they won't have a jury. >> god forbid you get to a jury in this case. >> laura: jury trial? >> maybe not against donald trump but the other people. my colleague, larry tribe, changed his mind and says you can prosecute a sitting president. he had previously when clinton was president, said you can't property a sitting president. but i think he was right the first time, not this time iflt don't think you can prosecute a sitting president. it was not clear. >> laura: we'll see. but i think he hah to get the best team in place, i don't care what color or background. women attorneys, harmeet, they're really smart. that's why you want to bring them in. >> absolutely. >> laura: thanks, guys. great segment.

kids, it took almost six months, but we're finally seeing surveil ladies and gentlemen vildo of the vehicle as shooting suspect. what took so long? what the oh, manatees. aka "the sea cow"" oh! there's one. manatees in novelty ts? surprising. what's "come at me bro?"

it's something you say to a friend. what's not surprising? how much money matt saved by switching to geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more.

>> laura: the parent company of the mandalay bay hotel in vegas released the video of steven paddock in the days before the deadliest mass shooting in u.s. his friday. they show him standing close to the bellhop as they delivered numerous bags full of what we know now, weapons and ammunition. as the prime suspect in the october shooting, paddock's motive remains a mystery as he apparently killed himself rather than captured. let's ask the experts what the videos might reveal. randy sutton, retired las vegas police officer. aaron cohen is a security and counter terror specialist. great to see both of you. randy, let's start with you. i want to go piece by piece if

we can through the video. i think it's really important for us to get specific, and advance the analysis as we do it. first we're watching stephen paddock checking in, the video we've been calling for for months at the mandalay front desk. let's watch it. you can see him checking in. you guys have both watched it. what should we be looking for? >> what we're seeing is, he's a high roller. he's a heavy gambler. he's checking in at the v.i.p. desk, which is affording him -- he doesn't have to stand in line like other people, it's expedited process. they know him very well, he's just putting his name in there, getting all of the credit card stuff situated. and he's on his way. >> laura: let's move on to the next piece of video. this is with the bell boy, all of the luggage. big bag. and he's bending over to fix his

pants. why is that in any way relevant? >> well, he takes the back entrance which the hotel claims is not uncommon. taking a service elevator. i've never brought bags into a hotel in vegas and gone through the service elevator. that's an advantage. pardon me while i look at the footage and i'm smaning, second long delay. his body language, hands in his pocket, legs are crossed, he's trying to block out any nervousness. he has one hand up, right now. he's in, it just looks like he's generally uncomfortable. fidgeting with his face, touching his face, that's not uncommon with the behavioral red flag somebody trying to cover something. again, he's scratching his head, as i look at the footage. all of these, this is nonverbal communicating which is what i'm trained in, specifically, in israel for boarding flights in israel, to go to israel. this type of behavior, you can't

lie with nonverbal communicating. somebody is covering intensely, he's fidgeting, shuffling, let's getted cart moving, uncomfortable, the shirt is untucked, could be a weapon on his waist. >> laura: the time line that is apparently not agreed to, there's no time line that all authorities seem to say yes this is how it happened. this there's a lot of swirling conspiracy they aries about what happened. the guy was not he was known by authorities, we thought he wad a criminal history but there wasn't a criminal history. >> there's a lot at play here. what we saw today, is very interesting in a couple of different ways, laura. this is the first time that we have been given the access to see him engaged in his daily

activities while he was staying at the hotel. you have to ask what is the timing, why is this happening now? it's interesting that the hotel finally decided to give up this footage to a major news source. what's the reason for that, is it because there is so much in play here, with people, you know, espousing conspiracy they aries f you look at this, there's finally something that we can actually, being interested in the subject, finally getting to see something here. >> laura: are we seeing something, aaron, that tos us, the kind of guy he is? or motivation? we're not getting to any of that. he's a guy who sat in front of a slot machine for hours and hours and hours. brought the heavy bags in, service elevator, v.i.p. check-in, swaying back and

forth, the extra video here, where we see him swaying back and forth with the bell boy as well. which we're going to see him there. there it is. but, still, we know nothing about this guy. the biggest mass shooting in u.s. history and we know still very, very little about him. aaron? >> that's right. that's why i'm jumping all over. look at him, he has the hands in his pockets, awkward shuffle, he's nervous, projecting nervousness, he's flagging like crazy. these are the red flags that we look for, again, in israel, the difference between how we do security and how the rest of the world does security, we know that you can spot the behavior of a murderer before he commits the act of murder. just his red flag. he's flagging like crazy. not mandalay bay's fault. no one is trained to do this. except for certain aspects of the fbi for their profiling. certain portions of bortder patrol getting better. we don't know about this guy. it's a complete mystery.

i understand all. conspiracy. to go to randy's piece, i have known randy for a while, he's very, very smart and knows vegas better than anybody, how hotels are. be on voulgsly the hotel put out the video to cover their butts. they want to get it out there, look, we can't -- the hotel is basically, to me, saying, guys, you look at the evidence here, you look at this guy, and you can see just as we can, that he's just a normal guy, he's gambling, checking in. but once you start cracking this thing open, it's, laura, how do we use this video. >> laura: to prevent the next time. >> prevent it from happening. >> 20 bags? that's crazy. >> what about the pathology that hasn't been addressed, the pathology of the heavy gambler, some one that can spend eight hours at a time, literally, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars at a sitting, how do you think that plays into the factors here? i think that there's something

here that's being missed. >> what do you think is being missed? that's my israeli answer, where you going? >> i think that the pathology of the degenerate gambler, play as role in the way we should be looking at this man as suspect. >> it's isolated, sits in front of the machine, you sko say that about a lot of people. not everybody that sits in front of a machine, blue haired people all over regular as sitting in front of machines. >> what it comes down to is the tools have already been developed to be able to predict violence. you look at behavior. the question is when are we going to take the model that works and how do we disperse to it the megahotels and casinos, and all of the other megainfrastructure places, like the massive mall in minnesota. >> laura: absolutely. >> and look and create behavioral detection programs. you can't throw more security guards at this problem.

you have to train the guards. as soon as we start taking the profession more seriously, then i think we'll start having a different conversation. >> laura: it takes money, training, and you can't be politically correct. we're all politically correct. that's the problem. i want to have you both on radio. >> i'm necessity toronto, doesn't get any more politically correct. >> laura: absolutely. we have to continue it in radio. up next, is "you tube" trying to stifle free speech? gun owners take note, details ahead. liberty mutual stood with me when this guy got a flat tire in the middle of the night, so he got home safe. yeah, my dad says our insurance doesn't have that. what?! you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.

fthere's flonase sensimist.tchy and watery near pollen. it relieves all your worst symptoms including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. and all from a gentle mist you can barely feel.

flonase sensimist. >> laura: "you tube" has announced it is increasing its crackdown on firearms videos ahead of saturday's massive pro gun control march in washington. the site banned videos showing how to make firearms fire more rapidly. in april "you tube" will ban videos selling guns and certain accessories as well as those that illustrate how to make or modify guns. is this limiting free speech given the sheer size of "you tube"? let's discuss that with independent women's voice president and fox news contributor tammy bruce in new york. here with me in washington, democratic strategist. great to see you. tammy, i'm worried the tech companies become so big and so powerful they're like mini governments. then you start seeing the censorship kick n your reaction, now gun instructional videos, not bomb making videos but gun

instructional videos. >> that's the worry. if they're concerned about the nature of teach something one how to make a gun it's different than having an impact on instructional videos, even safety videos, how to clean your firearm. we know this will abe becaused. but this is the other dynamic. it's not technically censorship, the first amendment business the government and forestalling the government from doing this. we're living in an age even the founders couldn't imagine, entities like google and facebook as we know have such a large control of content of information, information about our own lives, and we rely on them, we've built lives and business is a round these entities. now the issue is about squelching commercial speech. this is what the government, it's ironic, versus conservatives who don't want regulation. this is a world that's created where it's not just about convenience or fun of communication but it business

our lives and our businesses and how we raise our children, et cetera. so we do have to begin to deal with it. >> laura: you have to be careful, limit's move on and talk about what this means for viewpoint discrimination. could this be the beginning of viewpoint discrimination by some of these tech companies? it's now making a gun, what about making something that could be turned into a knife? >> we have to think about this from a couple of point of view. first point of view is recognize that maybe we have to read this legislation in congress when it comes to the power -- >> laura: monopolistic competition, you're killing our audience. >> it's important to talk about this. >> laura: but you're so big and powerful that you control big band widths of information. >> exactly. that limits things in a lot of different ways f you want to move on to the other point, whether or not "you tube" should have this content on their site or not, we have to remember freedom of enterprise, freedom of speech goals both ways.

a large company has decided in their right, their right to do, they do not want to have this content on their website. that's something we have to respect. >> laura: would you feel the same way if a major company that big, offense, decided we're not going to put any, pick your politically correct -- lgbt support group on our site because we don't agree with it. would you not be on the show tonight saying, how dare you control, that's casting aspersions on an entire communities. gun owners here or people who have free choice to be whatever they want sexually. >> laura doesn't that bring it back to lobby hobby and cases like that, on the right were you talking exactly about the same thing. we have to respect freedom of speech being a two way street. what america is all about. protecting freedom of enterprise, protecting the right of "you tube" and google, the alphabet, past company, not to have the con don't there. that's what america is based on. >> laura: and tommy, quick, final word, real quick. >> look, it's healthy, can you

deal with it on the abortion issue, is it discussion about getting rid of the nature of arguments from pro-choicers you would be hearing the same kind of outrage. we have to make sure as your point goes to, that this is about viewpoints. and the nature of what's being squelched. like shadow banning conservatives on twitter and problems with conservative news sites on facebook. we have already seen the trend. ironically and strangely enough doesn't impact people on the left. >> laura: out of time, great segment, we will have you both back, it's short. a leader of the democratic party and congressman is calling for a maximum wage? i'll explain. ♪ so, work is changing. ♪ we're told the robots are coming for our jobs, ♪ that the algorithms will replace us. ♪ but we are resilient, born to adapt, wired to learn.

sure, change is coming, but we will find opportunity. search for greatness. search indeed.

>> laura: all right, for decades we've been hearing about the battle over the minimum wage. now, things have gotten so crazy in d.c. that democrats are actually calling for a maximum wage. democratic congressman ellis of minnesota, deputy chair of the dnc, hopes to be a wage trail blazer. >> i made a statement about maximum page. what i'm saying is if you make more than 20 times more than people who actually make the products and dot services of

your company, then we're going to tax you more. >> laura: i don't think he understands what he's saying there. what should the maximum wage be, congressman? ellison didn't spell it out. but he did suggest that $300 on hour might be enough for, say, the ceo of mcdonald's. the idea of a maximum page, while it doesn't have wide appeal and safe to say. but one of ellison's high profile friends might support it as way to get back at the people really running american business. let the conspiracy theorys begin. >> everywhere, they take on the language, the culture. but they run the money. they run the business. when there's a jewish holiday everything gets silent. >> laura: if only screwy louie

would get silent. we'll follow ellison's quest for a maximum wage. we think there should be a maximum term in office for people whose ideas are as stupid as this one. we will be right back. with the last bite. i'm just worried about the house and taking care of the boys. zach! talk to me. it's for the house. i got a job. it's okay. dad took care of us.

>> laura: it's time for the last bite. washington is a tough place, particularly as we age. there are lifetime supreme court appointments to maintain, chairmanships to protect, and staying in shape is really important part of life in the capital city. so we decided to drop in on the washington home for semi retired liberals. lo and behold, it was weights and stretching day. ♪

>> while we are down here, do you want to wrestle? >> i don't do wrestling. >> laura: ruth bader ginsburg looking good. shannon bream is up next here in washington. >> shannon: she can do a lot of push-ups, i've heard. thank you so much, laura. i am shannon bream in washington. this is a fox news alert. another white house personnel shake-up, getting closer to the cabinet. president trump says he wants secretary of state rex tillerson gone, national security advisor general h.r. mcmaster on his way out. former ambassador and russia critic john bolton slated to step in. also today, the president vows to make america stronger and richer by following through on heavy tariffs. as china promises if the president wants a trade war,