i am loving it that the news media is having a meltdown because i use the comey standar standard. let not your heart be troubled. she is here. laura ingraham. the comey standard. we are going to call a president a mob. all right, the comey crime family, the mueller crime family in the clinton crime family. >> laura: there are certain words one can use anymore, don't you know that? >> sean: i told them i was using the comey standard. they really need to be able to follow the bouncing ball. >> laura: we follow it. you are a great dad, and you go all over the country to these tennis tournaments, you are always doing stuff with your kids. >> sean: you are kind.

you are a great mother too. i love your kids. they are awesome. >> laura: i can't wait to swim in your pool this summer. my kids are already there. sean hannity, great show. good evening from washington. i am laura ingraham and this is "the ingraham angle." we have a series of jaw-dropping development. first, those trump-bashing fbi lovebirds peter strzok and lisa page still have their security clearances. are you kidding me? what does it take to get the partisans out of the fbi? john solomon is here to detail the latest example of shocking bias in the fbi and doj. plus, ben shapiro has become the face of free speech on campus, and he will speak freely in our "defending the first" series. diamond & silk are here. to react after ceo

mark zuckerberg took questions on capitol hill about their case. raymond arroyo will be here to explore the london mayors wacky new expanded knife control plan. a report on the nationwide pro-life walk out today that news media covered. later, tonight's angle, what white house, house speaker paul ryan's decision to step down, what it really means for the future of the g.o.p.? first, "the ingraham angle" gets results. last night on "the angle," how devin nunes issued this ultimatum to rod rosenstein and fbi director christopher wray. robert koster from "the washington post" speculating that you are on the verge of moving to hold christopher wray and rod rosenstein in contempt of congress. and that you have a deadline of tomorrow apparently to get the information. is this a real possibility? >> we are going to get the

documents. we are going to get the two pages. so they can either cough them up now or it will get really complicated starting tomorrow night. >> laura: what are the chances you will hold them in contempt of congress? >> i can tell you we are not going to just hold them in contempt. we will have a plan to hold him in contempt and impeach. >> laura: to impeach christopher wray? >> absolutely. we are not messing around. >> laura: this afternoon the fbi and doj caved, a government source saying that nunes, congressman trey gowdy were shown a largely unredacted version of the memo. sources tell fox news tonight there are still serious questions about the underlying intel and the credibility of the sources used to initiate the russia probe. here to react to today's develop much, republican congressman jim jordan of ohio.

congressman, all is well, right? they coughed up the electronic communication, the two-page document after the comment last night by nunes on the show. >> a step in the right directio direction. there were still redactions in it. sometimes i go to the fundamental, why is it that folks in the department of justice get to see unredacted things but members of congress elected by the people of this great country can't save -- can't see them? if you do because they say that you leaked. >> what i know is the american people want answers and you can't get answers to important questions that deal with their fundamental liberties if you don't have access to that documents. >> laura: why does christopher wray, excuse me, peter strzok and lisa page still have their security clearance? >> same issue. they are so compromised bob

mueller shook them off his team. but they still have security clearance and members of congress can't see documents. we had a new point person of the department of justice. john lausch is the new point person. to give documents to congress that we are entitled to. he comes in to talk to mr. meadows and i yesterday along with other lawyers, asking four simple questions. once the number of documents? i said what is the standard for determining how the reductions are done and what are the steps and how the process works? i don't know. i don't know. leads the important question, when are we going to the documents? i don't know. my attitude is like devin nunes. if things don't change dramatically, i am talking days, not weeks or months. if they don't change dramatically than impeachment and contempt and resignations should all be on the table because we are tired of it.

more important, the american people are tired of it. >> laura: when you say impeachment, resignation, firing, who are we talking abou about? >> talking about the guys were supposed to be running the department of justice. jeff sessions and rod rosenstein. they are supposed to be in charge. they are supposed to give us information. never forget the underlying issue. they took an opposition research document, dressed it up and made it look like legitimate intelligence, took it to a secret court to get a secret warrant test by a fellow citizen associate with the trim campaign and they didn't tell the court who paid for the document and more importantly in those renewals and the fisa court, they didn't tell the court that the author of the document, christopher steele, had his relationship terminated with the fbi because he went and linked to the press. >> laura: according to what you've seen, it looks like actually strzok wrote it or significantly contributed.

people understand, we are talking about the two-page document that was the basis for beginning the surveillance. >> the two-page document that nunes and trey gowdy launched it. i think it is associated with papadopoulos. >> laura: strzok wrote the document or significantly directed the writing of it. >> his deputy had a counterintelligence -- involved in that. >> laura: and writing about insurance policies and so forth. >> also likely had a big influence on the dossier even though he may not have signed it, he had big influence. >> laura: what is the time frame? throwing around words like impeachment, resignation firing. >> it should all be on the table. if they're not going to improve, we have been asking this information for five months. we do jeff sessions' says he is serious about complying. he says he hears you. >> i don't like special council

councils. but we need a second special counsel. >> laura: you are not getting one. >> can the fbi investigate themselves? john lausch, seems like a nice guy but, who do they answer to? rod rosenstein. the employees are going to investigate their boss? that's how this is going to work? >> laura: if you were the president, would you fire rosenstein? >> i think those things should be on the table. resignation, impeachment, contempt. >> laura: mark warner gave a comment. he says he is fed up with the complaints about this. >> it's fairly typical of the way the house majority has operated. frankly outside the boundaries of what most of us would be a would be appropriate. obviously not in any sense bipartisan. >> when i talk to folks back home, they are fed up with the double standard, the idea that

there is one set of rules for regular people and different rules for clinton, comey, lynch. >> laura: congressman jordan, thank you. furthermore, let's bring in brett pullman, former u.s. attorney. and harry litman, deputy assistant attorney general during the bill clinton administration. great to see you. brett, your view of the document production. you heard what congressman jordan said. palpable frustration with the thwarting of what the g.o.p. majority believes is the rightful oversight role of the legislative branch over this process that led to the spying on an american citizen through the use of this fisa court. >> it's interesting to hear representative jordan because he is absolutely correct. they have oversight responsibility. i have the luxury of working in

the senate prior to becoming the u.s. attorney. during that four year period pf time, i heard the democrats asking again and again for the department of justice to be transparent. give us documents. it's ironic for me to see them saying hold up. this is not their prerogative. they are going too far. no. the department of justice has long held congress with some disdain and has treated them as a step brother or sister, not worrying about what they want and not answering their subpoenas or requests for documents. i saw it front and center. >> laura: i think the democrats were the party that was going to protect the people against government overreach. the government intel, they are going to be spying on americans. it's a heavy foot. we don't trust it.

we don't trust the big government because people have rights. now you have the democrats seeming to give carte blanche to the fisa court and the way it operated with this application for the warrant and so forth. this is legitimate for congress to one of these documents why are they not getting this information in a timely fashion? >> a couple points. i think it's right, and brett sort of underscores it. it's a perennial debate. it isn't democrat versus republican. it is the hill versus doj. plays out all the time. why are they getting it? here is what the department would say i think it's pretty legitimate. congressman jordan says it's still unredacted. yes, there were two redactions in the document they saw today. one was the name of a foreign agent. the other was the name of a foreign country. people in the fbi, democrat or republican. >> laura: i've got you. why does it take the threat of

impeachment to get information? what are they hiding? you have to threaten impeachment of the head of the fbi or another high-ranking official to get it? it's wild, truly wild. >> again, laurel, there's the whole point, the fbi says it's going to take a while. >> laura: say two-page document. >> i hear you. on that specific document, what is the problem? it's the potential revelation of specific foreign agent. one more thing which is you made the right point. it's not a democrat, republican issue. the hill does leak like a sieve and even the chairman's record is not so good. >> laura: i've got to read the headline in "the washington post." i want your reaction.

steve bannon is out there. pitching white house on planter cripple euler probe. the first step would be for trump to fire rod rosenstein. brandon recommending the white house ceases cooperation with mueller. according to bob costa. what would that lead to? >> it's not going to be without any sort of debate. i will tell you that is something you know when you serve in the department of justice. you serve at the pleasure of the president. i was told that maybe 100 different times when i was nominated, confirmed, and served as the united states attorney. the president does have that prerogative. we are in dicey political times. we understand that. what we don't know is why isn't there a more aggressive analysis that's been done when the fbi has leaks, when the fbi has

issues, when they have presented information to a judge, a fisa judge which we hold sacrosanct that process, when they have given information that they known to be bought and paid for information, how is that not something that at the highest levels of the department of justice they are taking a close measure look and analysis of. >> laura: we are doing this thing called the "defending the first" series. talking a lot about the media's role. harry, a friend of mine says what happened to "the washington post"? it used to be let's get to the heart of corruption in government. now it's all about the porn payments. it's not about, we could have abused a process that allowed the government to spy on an american citizen, doing so for purely political purposes. to prevent someone getting elected president, as an insurance policy and then after

he was elected to undo it. that is something an investigative reporter should be salivating over. let's get to the bottom of it. seems to be a fascinating lack of curiosity on the part of many so-called mainstream journalists. >> all right, first, i think they go where the news is. you might remember in nixon and watergate, political leaders -- >> laura: peter strzok, lisa page, cheryl mills. plenty of characters here. >> what i am saying is the news about tawdry events. >> laura: bleached, uranium. >> let me, brett bob brought ts back to the fisa point. the question is not worthy probe originates but whether it is bona fide. was linda tripp a solid,

credible person? paula jones, richard mellon scaife? no, they had biases but the question for the judge and congress was was the info bona fide? >> laura: gentlemen, fantastic segment. we have more. while there is still no evidence the president colluded with russia, the special counsel probe keeps widening, intensifying. contrast that with the doj and fbi efforts to exonerate hillary clinton and her scandals. now that the fbi has conducted an intrusive and possibly unconstitutional raid on the president's personal attorney michael cohen, we have to ask where were the feds when it came to clinton's lawyer and advisor cheryl mills? how did she end up with immunit immunity? john, i don't mean to go after the whole profession of

investigative reporting but this is a wild thing. we have you and carter and a few others but not many who were really interested in this. >> i say this a lot. on some days i don't recognize the profession i got into 30 years ago. not the curiosity we used to have. >> laura: let's talk about this, the double standard. is it more conservatives complaining, hillary is gone come out of the picture, where we harping on hillary? >> the facts are clear. talk to republicans who say there's been a double standard. look at the facts. there was a moment where someone close to hillary clinton lied. the vendor who erased the email archives while they were under subpoena by congress. >> laura: documents under subpoena. everybody understanding this. you destroy the documents under

subpoena, defective obstruction of justice. >> he lied about it the first time. mike flynn, when he was accused of lying, they charged him. when papadopoulos was accused of lying, they charged him. this guy, they immunize. they start to interview him. he says he can't answer the questions. the question, did hillary clinton's lawyers instruct you to destroy those documents question ricky says i can't answer. how can you have attorney-client privilege. he is not the client. he was a vendor. fbi said okay. >> laura: what law school did he go to? >> donald trump lawyers, you have your office rated and you hear about how hillary clinton's lawyers. the fbi throws their hands up up and says we are done. you can see why they come for the idea there is a double standard. >> laura: do we know how many people in hillary's inner circle received immunity? do we know for sure? >> we know at least five.

>> laura: cheryl mills, close personal advisor and attorney. >> to other attorneys. then the witness. i believe there's a fifth one, the i.t. director who set up the email system. >> laura: huma abedin was never offered immunity? not able to just send documents to another computer? classified, secret documents? >> there was a time when huma abedin was under investigation for time sheet fraud. she was charging hours for the government. nothing happened there. that's why the republicans have these crimes. >> laura: cheryl mills involved in scrubbing the 30,000 emails. doj allowed. attorney client privilege expanded during the clinton probe and shrunk during the rate of cohen. you did some original reporting

on strzok and page. we know that they have their security clearances. they can look at these documents that are being sought by congress but ranking members of these key committees cannot see them. >> it's been a real frustration for congress. there is a lot of history to this. the fbi's always willing to share information when their conduct is not being investigated. once the table turns on them, they've been reluctant. 9/11, waco, they have always resisted oversight. >> laura: and a lot of americans are wondering why peter strzok and lisa page have aged job still. john solomon, thank you. up next, what paul ryan's departure really means. stay there.

>> laura: what paul ryan's departure really means. that's the focus of tonight's angle. people seem so surprised by >> ryan's announcement today. i think it all makes perfect sense. after all, john boehner is gone. eric cantor is gone. now paul ryan is out. it should be set up front i have known paul ryan for a long time. he's a stand-up person. he is a man of deep faith. he's a man committed to his family which he said was the reason for his retirement. >> all three of our kids are teenagers. i realize if i'm here for one more term, my kids will only have ever known me as a weekend dad. i just can't let that happen. >> laura: on a personal level, this makes perfect sense. remember, ryan excepted the speakership with a lot of reluctance. on the political level, this reveals the schism between the

establishment wing of the party and the conservative populist trump wing. let's not forget how tortured and outright critical ryan was of trump before and after his nomination. >> this is not conservatism. what was proposed yesterday is not what this party stands for and more importantly, is not what this country stands for. >> you have said throughout the process that you will support the republican presidential nominee. now you have a presumptive nominee, donald trump. will you support him? >> well, to be perfectly candid with you, jake. i'm just not ready to do that at this point. i'm not there right now. i regret those comments he made. i don't think, claiming a person can't do their job because of their race is kind of the textbook determination of a racist comment. >> laura: after all of that, they were able to forge a personal and working

relationship. >> we talked quite often. >> laura: can you pick up the phone and call him? any time. we talk anytime. we talk about every thing. we talk about policy. we talk about families. we talk about kids. we talk about everything. >> laura: the speaker and the president worked together on the tax cut bill which will no doubt be the highlight of their collaboration. paul ryan was great on the life issue. he empowered portland house investigations. on many other fronts, he leaves the house with much unfinished business. the house passed their own obamacare repeal bill, ryan and mcconnell were unable to take it over the finish line. his long-sought desire to reform entitlements, big share of the federal budget, never went anywhere. the true tragedy is that ryan's swan song will be the nightmarish $1.3 trillion almond in this spending bill. it's expected to explode the

deficit to over $1 trillion by 2020. for someone who dedicated a lot of his political life to fiscal responsibility, that is a tough legacy. let's face it. speaker ryan was also uncomfortable with president trump's positions on everything from tariffs to the wall to foreign policy. the two of them represent opposing strains of conservatism in some sense. one, the free-trade, more interventionist establishment, that's paul ryan. and the other a more american first populism. that's trump. the speaker's departure is a clear sign in my mind that trump's vision, not ryan's, is the future of the party. people misread the investigation mania around the white house as a sign that the president's agenda is unfocused, unsteady, may be unpopular. in reality, these investigations were the insurance policy

against the tide of conservative populism that trump represented. they needed to stop trump because his vision is actually pretty popular and it's actually working. manufacturing is up. unemployment is down. china is back on his heels in making trade concessions. rocket man is ready to flush his nukes. unbelievable. regulations are being slashed. great for business. even on issues where paul ryan, he used to own these issues, trump is now in his own way making a difference. just yesterday the president signed an executive order pushing work requirements. hallelujah, for those on public assistance. ryan's exit, like flake and corker before him, is another indication the establishment unable to be trump in 2016 is frankly just out of steam. we all know the phrase if you can't beat them, join them. in this case, it seems to be if you can't beat them, leave them.

the establishment may finally be beating the party to the man who dug in from them in the first place. that's the angle. joining me now with reaction is cumbersome and shawn xi. matt schlapp, chairman of the american conservative union. congressman duffy. , paul ryan, personally great guy, love him. he and the president were never together on key issues. this omnibus sticks in trump's craw rightly. >> paul ryan is a good friend of mine. the reason he's leaving is not policy differences. he's a family guy. his kids are teenagers. he lost his dad when he was young, wants to be there for his own kids. >> laura: you are totally right. and that's fine.

>> paul ryan and president trump speak all the time. they work on policy together. regulation, tax reform, people in the military, energy independence. >> laura: did trump win on the border and trade on on being less interventionist? he won on those three issues. >> when you put congress in one chamber, that's unfair. if you look at what we've done in the house, we've accomplished the president's agenda. moved over 400 bills the president loves over to the senate. mitch mcconnell, his partner in chuck schumer, they don't allow us to get the big items. to blame paul ryan for the failures of the senate are completely unfair. if you look at, establishment versus new republicans or conservatives, it's donald trump who says no entitlement reform.

>> laura: entitlement reform has gone nowhere. he's given speeches on it. passed legislation. >> we need presidential leadership to help us in trump has been absolutely -- >> laura: if it weren't for trump, you would be in the minority. i love paul ryan too. it's not about personal stuff. he deserves to be with his family. he's a great guy but on the key issues trump got elected, they weren't on the same page. i'm sure he is leaving for his family. but this is not paul ryan's party. it's donald trump's party. conservative, populist. it's not about the man. it's about the principles. speak of the key for paul ryan, what happens after he leaves. paul ryan can spike the ball in the tax cut bill but there's a whole other agenda. >> laura: $1 trillion deficit we will have. how is that making america great? >> paul ryan's political

advisors come from the mitt romney wing and they were uncomfortable with how the president approaches the major issues. >> laura: he is embarrassed by trump. >> he is not comfortable. >> laura: october 8, 2016, a day everybody is piling on trum trump. the billy bush tape came out. this is one of my favorite scenes ever in wisconsin politics. >> there is a bit of an elephant in the room. and it's a troubling situation. i'm serious. it is. i put out a statement about this last night. i meant what i said and it is still how i feel. that's not what we are here to talk about today. thank you so much, you guys. god bless you all. thank you. appreciate it.

>> laura: that was bad. that was like eric erickson dissed inviting trump. there was bad judgment. don't kick the guy when he's down. >> i absolutely agree. it took paul ryan longer than me to get on board with president trump. the omnibus bill, donald trump could have that bill. >> laura: he should have. paul ryan should've told him to veto it. >> there wasn't enough in the bill to justify putting everybody in the line. >> i agree with you but you have to understand that the senate, they gave us not just the military money but gave us the nondiscretionary spending. >> your colleagues know -- >> i agree. >> laura: we need a hard break. anyway we could continue? >> the ryan kids and the family is celebrating.

>> laura: i love them. they are great people. but it is trump's party now. it's matt schlapp's party now. still to come, "defending the first" series.

>> laura: time for our "seen and unseen" segment. what's really going on behind the big cultural stories of the day. topics run the gamut from the media blackout on today's pro-life walkout on college

campuses and the mayor of london calling for knife control after he sees murder rate is surpassing new york. we are joined by fox news contributor raymond arroyo. raymond, where do we start? >> we have to start with sadiq khan, the mayor of london, knife control. this is the same man, to remind everybody come in two years ago, he rescinded the policy of searching and stopping people who might have knives, might have weapons because he said it's racist and might be islamaphobic. >> laura: do they only stop islamic -- >> they stopped a lot of islamic folks because these are members of gangs. it's mostly gang activity in london. eight to 15 knife attacks a day in london. now he's passing these knife control measures which means you cannot have knives delivered to your home and you can't order them online.

>> laura: what about wedding registries? steak knives are great. the ginsu knife set is one of my favorite things to get on late night tv. >> you better borrow it from someone else. this is what he tweeted. he said "i am joining -- oh, sorry. >> laura: no excuses. everyone who carries the knife will be caught. >> if you are a baker, you need a knife. if you are a tech guy, you work on -- you need a knife. >> laura: we use knives that my house to just cut stuff. >> a psychologist quoted in the london times, why do we need these deadly weapons at home. we need curved instruments. it's a country of butter knives apparently. that's all you need. >> laura: what are they gonna use? >> what next?

>> laura: sean duffy is a big lumberjack in wisconsin. he was a lumberjack. in the old days. this is comical now. this is what everybody used to joke about. what's next? hair spray. that could be deadly. >> piano wire. piano control. you can kill with anything. i don't know. >> laura: pro-life walkout today. i didn't hear anything about this. >> you had a teacher on yesterday who was at rocklin high school. she raised the question. a month ago you had school walkouts all over the country. covered with helicopters and lab reports. it wasn't only that, school walkouts. organized by the women's march. now a student, brandon gillespie at rocklin high school, he decided to stay job pro-life

walkout. 200 schools participated. 80 colleges. no coverage at all. >> laura: will will he be on te cover of magazines? >> no magazine cover. it's ridiculous. there are barely pictures of it. we will put a few pictures up. very little video, no local or national coverage. it's an outrage. he did it to prove a point. >> laura: he did it. >> his school district in sacramento made special provisions when the kids walked out of school for gun control. they were given use of school accessories, microphones and speakers. they didn't afford him those luxuries. now lawyers are about to sue the school, and they've already threatened them, saying this is content desquamation. >> laura: it is like a "defending the first." here we are. it's like we talked about last night. john boehner has been known to enjoy his cigs and booze.

he is a scotch drinker and perpetually tan. he's a great guy. i like him. now he's changed his thinking, don't you know, on pot. we call it cannabis. makes us feel better to call it cannabis. >> in 2011 he said i am on an altar boy opposed to the legislation of marijuana -- now he tweets out, he joined cannabis distributor. >> laura: how much money as the making of pot? wrecking the minds of young people. >> i think the former speaker is finally seeing green, not only marijuana but those benjamin's. >> laura: we have enough problems. we don't need more kids. once your adults, it's fine. but kids are going to do it. i am adamantly. i know it's not the cool thing to be but i'm not wild about it.

>> terrible effects and he claims it's going to help veterans. the two oh, yeah. no, no, no. just be honest. if you want to make a lot of money on pot, just say it's better than going around the country speaking at 10,000 bucks a pop. they are going to pay me a huge amount of money to sit on their board. whatever it is, just be honest. don't try to claim you're doing it for the vets. >> i have to share this video. the president signed a piece of legislation today to help outlaw online human trafficking and prostitution. there was a survivor. >> it's about damn time. >> dancing during the signing.

joy. i like it. she was the first woman to sue back page. >> laura: i bet the feminists are all thrilled. raymond, awesome segment. up next to my shapiro joins us to discuss his quest to defend the first amendment.

>> laura: time for the second installment of our new series "defending the first" where we expose the enemies of the first amendment, free expression, and free thought. radio talk show host and daily wire editor in chief ben shapiro has emerged as one of the top defenders of free speech, particularly on campus. in a series of speeches of the last few years, shapiro has debunked sacred cows like safe spaces, micro-aggression, and the quest for multiculturalism

and diversity and not without risk to his own personal safety. >> and there it is, gang. guess what. do you know what? they are not going to stop us. [cheers and applause] >> if i attempt to enter that hall right there and sit down just to listen to somebody speak or if i attempt to ask questions or engage in free speech, you will have me arrested. >> laura: the tolerant one joining us now, ben shapiro. who we thought of it immediately when we launched this series. you don't look too threatening.

you've got some interesting ideas and thought-provoking conversations and you freak them all out. they have the headgear on, riot police. it is funny because it's so pathetic but it's also very dangerous because you do have the guts to go on college campuses. but there are a lot of conservatives i know who are invited to speak. do you know what they say? i have better things to do with my time. anyway, you can't blame them. but that's in itself chilling free speech. >> no question. so many universities shutting down free speech on college campuses. i don't blame conservatives who don't want to take their lives in their hands. i don't want to pretend this is happening in every campus but it's happening to a lot of conservatives. not just conservatives, people from jason peterson, heather macdonald, a wide variety of conservatives being rioted

against in some cases on campus. the administration has in some cases really not done enough to prevent that from happening. when they do attempt to stop the riots from happening, the way they do it is by bringing in a lot of cops on campus and suggesting we have to restrict the number of people who can attend the lectures. they end up restricting free speech. >> laura: irony, their free speech movement all started at berkeley. berkeley is ground zero of the anti-free speech movement in the united states. in the last couple days, an interesting development that fits with our series. at penn state, the student network along with other students and community members gathered to present a list of demands to the college president. the demands included denouncing and defunding hate groups on campus. i think to myself oh, my god. are the nazis on campus?

u.s. communist party? no, groups with anti-immigrant rhetoric. i guess that's someone who is in favor of enforcing the border. what does it mean? >> everything has been deemed hate speech on campus, up to and including, people were barred on certain campuses from writing donald trump's name when he was a candidate. i can only imagine the anti-immigrant rhetoric would be like let's enforce the border or deport illegal immigrants. it's not a shock. penn state was one of the campuses i visited and there was a near riot. i'm sure some of the people protesting against the conservatives on campus, and it was conservative groups they were protesting, were some of the same people who a couple years ago nearly tried to break through the doors were speaking to disrupt the lecture that i was giving. was amazing about all of this is that it's perfectly easy to have a nice event where people come and listen to me or listen any of the other people i mentioned and all of us are willing to have q&a for lasso, having

discussions, we had one last night at pepperdine where a lot of the student groups on the left and talking about groups, decided instead of boycotting they would ask questions we had a vertically nice conversation. unfortunately there's part of the left as distinguished from liberals at large, there's a big part of the left and it's going it says that it's incumbent to protect the campus from ideas that are dissenting. everyone who dissents must be thrown off. >> laura: and the reason they want to stifle speech is because your speech actually grows conservatism. it spreads the ideology. it draws people in. they have no idea. they are out of ideas. out of solutions. they are into demonization. you go to college campuses. you could be going to corporations and speaking, but you go to college campuses. i think the groups trying to cure life miserable or going after charlie kirk and turning

point usa, those groups, the list of who is behind this effort to really tamp down on free-speech, we know some of the big funded groups by george soros but go through that briefly. >> there are a lot of student groups that coordinate, groups associated with the women's march, a lot of groups associated with lack lives matter were active in this campus movement. antifa was the far edge movemen movement. the generalized attempt to shut down speeches by pressuring the administration, that's a lot of student groups that have been on campus since i was on college campuses. as a student myself. they continue to push for the idea that these campuses should be conservative free and complete safe spaces for people on the left not only because they think conservatives are going to convince people but they think conservatives are evil. they really think people like me are there to do them harm. when i show up and it turns out i am a relatively nonthreatening character and i've never really

beaten anyone up in my life for several reasons you can imagine, that's the impact. >> laura: again, you don't look too threatening. ideas are threatening to these alpeople. thanks so much. up next, diamond & silk.

>> laura: facebook's treatment of diamond & silk is just the latest example of censoring conservative voices. the pro-trump sisters became a hot topic. facebook ceo mark zuckerberg second day of grilling on capitol hill today. >> do you subjectively manipulate your algorithms to prioritize or censor speech? >> congresswoman, we don't think about what we are doing as censoring speech. there are types of content like terrorism that i think we all agree we do not want to have on our service. so we build systems that can identify those and can remove that content, and we are very proud of that work. >> let me tell you something right now. diamond & silk is not terrorism. >> laura: zing. let's get reaction from the ladies themselves. marsha blackburn jumped on it because mark zuckerberg was like, we are worried about

terrorism. i don't see any terrorism, i don't see any threat to community standards or whatever the heck their justification is. i don't see any of it. what did you think about the play you've got at the hearing and did you get any satisfaction from what mark zuckerberg said? >> well, first of all, i appreciate everyone that really stood up for us and our platform. even other conservatives. with mark zuckerberg, i was happy to hear him admit they made a mistake. now it's time for him to rectify that mistake. i would like, we would like to sit down and talk directly to mark zuckerberg so that he can rectify this here and make it right. >> laura: congressman barton brought you both up as well. let's play this. >> please ask mr. zuckerberg why is facebook censoring

conservative bloggers such as diamond & silk. facebook called them on saved to the community. that's ludicrous. they hold conservative views. that isn't unsafe. what's your response? >> congressman, in that specific case from our team made an enforcement error. and we have already gotten in touch with them to reverse it. >> laura: did you get contacted by facebook, and has this been reversed? >> no. we have not been in communication with facebook. we have not been contacted. we have not spoken to anyone over the phone, so that was a lie. >> laura: wait a second. this is the second night we've had you want. the second time facebook has said they have contacted you and this has been dealt with. this is the second night you have said no contact. you are either not telling the truth or facebook, and i'm sorry. i trust you guys, not facebook. have you checked your messages?

is your mailbox full? >> if you go to our facebook page, you will see where people are having issues with liking and following our page. the same algorithms are still there. no one has been in communication with diamond & silk. >> laura: they've got to get in touch with you. there is a headline out today. here it is. black trump supporters and fox news puppets diamond & silk accuse facebook of discrimination. they call you fox news puppets. then they state viral court jester's are easily president trump's most vocal black supporters and have made a name for themselves dancing for him and his administration. >> that publication is just envious. it's a small, minute publication. they are just trying to use us as quick bait because they know nobody ever reads their stuff.

if they put their stuff on facebook they have hardly any views. they have to use diamond & silk's names. >> laura: what is joy reid's role in that? she has some connection. editor in chief for two years. editor in chief. rosanne calls you comedians. she says to stop censoring them. are you comedians? >> i don't think we are comedians but what we say may be comical or funny. we really be telling the truth. we are trying not to be so funny, but it comes out funny. >> laura: i like it. you can have fun, ladies. you can have fun and do politics. and you do that and i love it. i love it. facebook, get in touch with diamond & silk. ladies, thanks so much. we'll be right back.

>> laura: before we go, remember, tweet me @ingrahamangle with reaction of the show and you might get a read on air.

that's an interesting one. i'm sure the establishment would love it. that's all the time we have tonight. shannon bream and the "fox news @ night" team is next. they have a big show on tap. >> shannon: i thought they were going to say that diamond & silk should be the next speaker of the house. that's where i thought you were going. they have to get elected to the house first but it could happen. great show. thank you. welcome to "fox news @ night." i am shannon bream in washington. new tonight, g.o.p. leaders on the house and help committee finally get a look at documents they say the doj has been withholding from them. just ahead of the subpoenaed that line. and a surprise move, the senate judiciary committee is moving forward with a bipartisan bill to protect special counsel robert mueller. the bill could go to committee as soon as tomorrow but what are its actual chances of getting past question plus company president dines with leading republicans tonight.