report as it relates to the hillary clinton email investigation to be any day this week and all the other news. we promise we will always be fair and balanced. we are not the destroy-trump media. let not your heart be troubled. laura ingraham has a big show. at no time to chitchat. take it away. >> laura: i love your pink tie. only certain men can pull it of off. that pink on you, seriously, you are masculine. you do like mma fighting, whatever that's called. >> sean: it's called mixed martial arts. i've got my second degree found out. i'm losing towards my black. >> laura: of course you are. >> sean: take the show, it's yours. >> laura: roundhouse kick to the head, you're down. good evening from washington, i'm laura ingraham, this is "the ingraham angle." we have our work cut out today. we are trying to squeeze so much great stuff for you into just one hour. abc moves really quickly, cancels roseann's hit show after

her racially charged weight. king and howard kurtz weighed in on whether abc's reaction was the right call. also andy mccarthy tells us why he now has no doubt that the obama administration spied on the term campaign and it explains why. plus, starbucks has every one of its workers spend the afternoon pondering whether they are unconsciously biased or racist. we have an exclusive look at the workbook they reflected over today. this is it, my notebook. lots of interesting notes in here. we are going to dig into this. i don't think most people have seen this. pretty wild. we are going to tell you why legalized pot laws have totally backfired and turned out to be a bonanza for, believe it or not, the drug cartels. but first, separating parents from children and fact from fiction. that's the focus of tonight's "angle" ." the media have been hammering

president trump, making scurrilous charges that his draconian immigration policies are separating families and losing track of illegal immigrant children. >> the trump administration is threatening to separate more parents and kids at the border screaming and crying please don't let me be taken away. they are traumatized. >> calls about 7600 of those children and they couldn't find 1500 of them. >> donald trump really is obsessed with perhaps the most sick part of the entire policy, separating families from each other. >> laura: predictably, "the new york times" also weighed in with a piece titled to the trump administration separate immigrant children from parents and lose them? well, as you will see, this is not reporting. it's called trying to create a narrative regardless of the actual facts to manipulate readers' emotions and ultimately force a change in policy. never one to forgo a ride on the

bandwagon, cnn's poss gold tweeted this. a picture of immigrant children and what appeared to be cages with the caption "first photos of separated migrant children of holding facility. the inference of course being that trump himself was confining him as immigrant children ripped from their mother's arms into wire cages. the same picture was shared by former obama officials like john favreau and the usual trump-hating activists such as women march board member linda. but there's only one problem with this photo. it's from 2014. when the saintly barack obama and the compassionate ones were all in charge. at the time, the left-wing media did not consider detaining illegals worth covering. but now that trump is trying to enforce our immigration laws, he suddenly just a heartless thug. gold had to retractor tweet but

she didn't apologize rating "deleted previous tweet because gave it impression of recent photo." they are from 2014. it gave the impression because you wrote that they were first photos of migrant kids in detention. it usually doesn't label something first photos when they are four years old. we are still waiting for "the new york times" to apologize for its outrageous headline. it turns out that the times could have answered their own question by reading further down in their own peace. did the trump administration separate immigrant children from parents and lose them? no, they clearly didn't because the times writes that those children had arrived alone at the southwest border without their parents. i have a question. how can you separate illegal alien children from their parents when the parents sent them here alone? there is a glaring loophole in the immigration law that forbids

border patrol from immediately deporting unaccompanied minors from central america, noncontiguous countries. the illegals know this so they abuse the system and i wld argue endanger their children in the process. so what happens when unaccompanied illegal minor -- but remember he or she could be 16, 17 or one day from his or her 18th birthday, by the way, crosses the border illegally? the united states then throws them into what is essentially a foster care program. according to steve wegner, and hhs official, the 10,000 children and teens in custody cost the taxpayers over $1 billion annually. others are sent to sponsors. so what happens is the government finds the kids sponsors or family members in the united states whom they can go live with as their case proceeds, or better put, as it drags on for years while of

course if you show up for their deportation or immigration hearing. so at the start of the trump administration lost immigrant kids, they didn't lose anybody. when hhs tried to check up on these kids with their sponsors, at times, illegal immigrant families themselves caring for the children, 1475 failed to take the calls or even respond to the government at all. so the immigrant kids aren't lost. their sponsors just haven't connected with the hhs, or made themselves available. but the media want to misconstrue that as losing a kid, okay. let's do that for a moment. hypothetically let's just say that that's correct. obama lost nearly three times the number of kids, "the new york times" reporting a 2016 inspector general report show that the federal government was able to reach only 84% of

children it had placed leaving 4,159 undercounted 4,159 unaccounted for. correct me if i'm wrong, i don't remember any media lashing out at obama for losing kids or separating them from their families. in fact, obama and his homeland security secretary try to a few times tried to adopt a hard-line on the unaccompanied minors when there was a huge rush at the border as you will recall back in 2014. >> our direct message to the families in central america, do not send your children to the borders. if they do make it they will get sent back. >> our message, to those who are coming here illegally, to those who are contemplating coming here illegally into south texas, is we will send you back. >> laura: one problem, they couldn't be sent home. they couldn't be deported

because of the insane immigration laws we currently have in place. by the way, which is why trump is right, the law has to change, congress must act. not only to end this unaccompanied minor loophole, but the catch and release program as well as chain migration, asylum fraud, all of it. so if you want to know why this anti-trump media narrative is being advanced at this time. why? it's because trump is close to making good on his promise to transform our immigration laws for the better. even the left realizes this issue is a winner for republicans. tom friedman, who is a favorite of the global elite, obviously "new york times" best-selling author. even he this morning was recognizing this issue as a vulnerability for democrats. >> i think there are several things that are true that democrats have to wrestle with. we cannot take every immigrant in a world that is splitting between a world of order and

disorder. >> laura: wow. now is not the time to go wobbly on immigration or embrace some type of blanket amnesty. there is one point that the left and the right should be able to agree on, especially given the recent media indignation. we all want children to be together, unified with their parents. so let's make that happen in the country of their origin. it is immoral to allow laws on the books that incentivize people to send their children alone into a foreign country or to frankly make a dangerous trip with their parents. and until those laws change, immigrant children will continue to be separated from their parents no matter what the president does now, and that's the "angle." president trump was on a roll at a rally that just wrapped up in nashville hitting on some of these issues. taking some shots at the dams over ms-13.

>> and of course, the ms-13 ms-13-lover nancy pelosi. she loves ms-13, can you imagine? remember? i said they are animals and she said how dare you say that. crying chuck wanted to have a lottery system. do you think they are sending us their finest? so they put names and we picked the names and they come in and then we wonder why we have problems. we are not going to be a stupid country anymore. >> laura: i'm sorry, i love that montage. let's discuss this into nights "angle" with the chairman of the american conservative union, matt, i'm not laughing for your name. we are not going to be stupid anymore. chris on, another favorite of mine. great to see both of you. >> great to be here. >> laura: let's take it away

on this. the president obviously taking a strong stand on the immigration issue tonight. the democrats i think know they have some vulnerabilities here on the ms-13 issue, the unaccompanied minor issue as i pointed out in the "angle." obama was sending back people, even a "huffington post," we have a great headline from "the huffington post." this is from march of last year. the hard truths about obama's deportation priorities. from 2009-2015, 56% of all immigrants were removed from the country had no criminal conviction. preliminary data from 2016 when obama was still in office suggested this trend of deporting noncriminals continued. it goes on and on and obviously had to deal with the unaccompanied minors that he claimed were going to be sent back in only 3.4% of them were ever deported. >> i don't think he was great on immigration. i've said that before, i will say it again. i think you probably could have worked with congress to have comprehensive immigration reform in his first term and he didn't.

and that's a failure of president obama, but that doesn't excuse what's going on right now. i understand that the story about people -- children being lost is a little bit overblown. they can't get in touch. i get that part. but there is still this bit where jeff sessions is separating children from their families when those families are coming here through regular ports of entry, seeking asylum, and that i have a problem with. i think most americans who have any compassion would have a problem with that. >> laura: do you think criminals could be separated from their family? you obviously know that. they are every minute of every day. >> the criminalized people seeking asylum is where i draw the line. >> laura: they are all legitimate seekers? we have a duty -- i want matt to chime in. we have a duty to take care of children in a different way than we take care of adults. that's from the floor's decision, the judges and so forth putting that burden on american government. that's fine, that's what we do, but part of that is separating

children from people who are trying toame the system. sessions was very car on this, otherwise we're just going have a massive flood of family units. we don't even know if they are actual families at the time. family units crossing the border. >> this is what happened. obama did not follow the law. when an adult crosses our border illegally he or she is breaking the law. the attorney general has no choice but to follow the law and what chris and other democrats are saying is that as we take the adult and put them into custody, which means they go to jail, that somehow the kids should go to jail to. that would be insane and inhumane and as a country we simply do not do that. one come kamala harris and his other folks who have also had the job of attorney general in their states -- it would be the same thing to say that she is separating parents from their children in california when parents commit crimes. it would be the same thing. >> you are conflating. >> no i'm not very >> yes you

are. >> when you commit a crime you go to a holding facility. it's the way it is. >> the difference here is that the trump administration has decided to treat asylum applicants as criminals and that's what i have a problem with. >> laura: it's not asylum applicants. >> you want people to come here through regular ports of entry will jeff sessions has said he will treat his criminals. >> laura: it's not just people applying for asylum. we are all thinking about asylum as the great caravan that showed up in san diego. it's all people. remember, obama and jay johnson said in those clips that i think nobody remember -- i play them all the time on my radio show. they both said don't bring your children here, we can't process this and you will have to go home. both of them said that, neither of them wallow through. and all but 3.4% of people who crossed our border illegally,

not seeking asylum, crossed illegally, for all those years, 3.4% were deported. that is a screwed up system. >> what president obama was doing by the statements was trying to discourage mass immigration of unaccompanied children to the country. >> laura: which is what sessions is doing. >> when he gets here he's whipping a baby out of his mother's arms. >> laura: worried about ripping babies away from others. let's talk about the illegal immigrant wife who was interviewed on cnn today about whether she was upset about her husband being deported. let's watch. >> i am not upset at our government due to the fact that i am a u.s. citizen and that our laws come first. our laws are broken and need to be fixed but i can't be met at trump for doing his job. >> laura: chris? >> [laughs] how many women did you have to do it -- how many immigrant

women did you have to interview to get that clip? i got to know. >> laura: it's a cnn bite. occasionally they stumble on the truth over there at cnn. no one's watching but occasionally they actually find someone who has the common sens sense. her point is that obama -- her point is that donald trump is actually following the law. if you are here illegally as jay johnson said, you don't have -- he said we are not going to give your permission. you are not going to get it. you are violating our laws. chris, go ahead. >> i get that. again, i believe in law and order. i believe in proper immigration. we have all failed in creating a system where we have an immigration that addresses the markets that are driving people to this country every day. >> laura: let's get the perspective of senator mike lee of utah whose new book is

already a huge "new york times" best seller. it's on my facebook and website. written out of history, the forgotten founders who fought for government. welcome senator. as always it's great to see her. i think our founders would be shocked to see what has happened to this country. obviously a whole different situation than our country's founding. you heard the debate we just had. you heard the statistics. president obama said these people are going to have to go home, then they all geto's day. they are relocated to centers anwe a ting check on them. a lot of them are going off the grid because they don't want to be deported, they don't want the kids to be deported. it's a perverse system which set up. >> that's exactly what is bringing these people here. that's exactly why these children are being separated from their parents. we had a government that refused to enforce the law and a government that's it we will deport you and then didn't. when that happens you end up being a magnet for illegal immigration. that's objects all kinds of children to exploitation, abuse, assault in many cases. but make no mistake, that is the

cause. >> laura: approximately 90% of all removal orders, that means deportation orders each year result from a failure for people to show up at their hearing. they don't show up for their actual immigration hearing. that's 90% of the unaccompanied minors are not showing up at hearings. so they come here, they know they are going to be able to stay here. what is the senate on the house cooking up? i heat, keep hearing about the administration is going to come out and agree to an amnesty with an end to chain migration. it's not quite the bob goodlatt goodlatte, what's going on? >> i would love to see it be the bob goodlatte bill. i think he's done a remarkable job of balancing competing interests. i hope they are not coming up with something like that cooked up in 2013. they told us we are coming up with a deal. it was rumored for many months, years in fact, that they were working on it. and it was about a thousand pages of something nobody had read.

people voted for it anyway and then they switched it and replaced it with a different bill. i fear they might be doing the same thing and i think they remember the consequence. >> laura: the freedom caucus doesn't want it. they are to come out and said we don't want amnesty, but can you get something positive? you could end his chain migration. that is a huge amplifier of immigration in the country, nonmerit-based. that's a big driver. >> absolutely. that's one of the things i like about the goodlatte proposal. it addresses that an addresses the daca situation. it does so in a responsible manner that shuts off the magnet. >> laura: i want to ask about the other news over the last few days, your colleague marco rubio said something i think interesting on abc this week. i would like your reaction, let's watch. >> it appears that there was an investigation out of the campaign but if certain individuals who have a history that we should be suspicious of that predate this presidential

campaign 2015-16. the fbi should look at people like that but they are not investigating the campaign. >> so you are saying president trump was wrong? >> i have seen no evidence that those people were part of an investigation on the campaign. >> laura: your reaction? >> his final statement might be true. he may have seen no evidence of any spying on the trump campaign. it doesn't mean it didn't happen. i think it's very difficult to prove that a dog didn't bark. i don't think he saying he didn't -- >> laura: you've got rubio, we will play a sound bite later on from trey gowdy. there are a lot of republicans who seem to be working overtime. a lot of them didn't support the president, working overtime to build a bob mueller, the mueller team. i think from the very beginning there have been a lot of people go up in surprise. great to see you as always. congrats on the book. great read as always. andy mccarthy is here next to

tell us why there is now no doubt that team obama spied on the term campaign, and more from the fbi agents who want to testify on how politics is destroying the bureau. that's next.

>> laura: in today's national

review andy mccarthy says there's absolutely no question that the obama administration spied on the term campaign. "the new york times" is trying to deflect from the news tonight with new information leaked from the doj suggesting that the president wanted jeff sessions to unrecuse himself from the russia probe and take control of it. joining us now andy mccarthy along with attorney and democratic strategist scott bolden. andy, a lot to get to hear. there are a lot of people coming out, rubio and now others in trey gowdy saying this whole thing about spying is kind of ridiculous. let's watch. >> i am even more convinced that the fbi did exactly what my fellow citizens would want them to do when they got the information they got in that it has nothing to do with donald trump. i think when the president finds out what happened is going to be not just mine, he's going to be glad that we have an fbi that took seriously what they heard. he was never the target.

it russia the target. >> laura: i got lots of text on my phone saying what's wrong with trey gowdy? >> nothing, he's perfect. >> laura: trey gowdy, we want you to come in the show. he's never been on the show. maybe now i know why he's not coming on. >> there's no question that they spied on the campaign. >> laura: he and rubio. a lot of people are saying it never happened. judge napolitano on fox tonight. >> what they are saying is what they think what the fbi did was appropriate. what they are saying is they had these guys they had concerns abouo had some russia baggage and it w appropriate for the fbi to check that out. i don't think anyone in his right mind would disagree with that. i think the question is how you go about doing that. >> laura: they are saying they were looking at russia. russia trying to metal with our system. didn't matter -- a democrat, they would have done the same thing. it happened to be trump, carter page on his list. >> if you were looking at a

corporation and you thought the corporation was being corrupted by three people you would go to the ceo and say i think we have a problem here, we need your cooperation. what they did instead was sent colbert operatives to pry information out. it well be that president trump, was not personally the target. >> laura: why didn't they do the briefing? why didn't they go to the head of the campaign. paul manafort, it's not going to go to him. why didn't they go to president trump? >> i will use your example. i'm not starting at the top. i'm starting at the source. what they did with his informant was went and talked and did outreach to two or three leaders in the campaign to test not whether trump was colluding with russia, but whether russia was doing outreach to the term campaign. how deep they may have gotten in there. and what would you want the fbi to do? and less you put a political overlay on it, they are doing their job.

they were trying to protect americans and have the g.o.p. would criticize this institution is if it's in subtype of deep state even in 2017. even in 2016. >> you would be cool with this at this with the obama campaign? >> i would be cool if the fbi was protecting our democracy and doing their job. how dare us. >> the bush 2008 justice department and fbi send informants into the obama 2008 campaign. go into the campaign. you are fine with that? >> it is the least intrusive means that they could pursue if they were going to go into a campaign. you all put a political overlay on it. you say this is politics. that's conjecture. >> laura: the reason i find -- andy, you wrote this in your piece today and you talked about how this is an odd thing -- it was a great point you made. it's an odd thing given the fact that obama wanted to have more

flexibility with demetri. clinton got the 500k speech in moscow that the podesta group represented putin's favorite bank. all the stuff happen, uranium one, but now they are worried that trump is going to be too close to russia. that's just an odd thing. i hadn't thought of it in that way before i read your piece. >> up until 11:00 on november november 8th, carter page was a conventional democrat. i personally find his beliefs about russia to be ridiculous to offensive. but he believes his wrote mike appeasing gluten is the best way to better relations. >> laura: just like we have a relationship with communist china that has like 17 times the economy of russia, we should have a relationship with russia. that's what i think. that's what i think he means. it's not about carter page. >> the clintons can be whatever you want them to say them to be.

but what does that have to do with putting an informant in place to investigate russia? this isn't about the clintons. this is about by october of 2016 we knew there was substantial contact between the people in the term campaign and russia. way too much for a political campaign. we know that the former cia director said as much. >> laura: does just as many contacts with the clinton campaign. >> not during the campaign. >> laura: all of her friends, are you kidding me? barack obama's -- the committee on foreign investment, giving uranium all over to russia. >> you are running out of time. >> laura: we are running out of time. >> if you keep talking we are going to be completely out of time. >> laura: what's the deal tonight with this? we have to get to the fbi informant issue. what's the deal tonight, andy, with "the new york times" story comes out, this russian collusion thing is collapsing. people don't like the feel of

that. on the issue of trump wanting sessions to unrecuse himself. that doesn't surprise me at all. i don't find that surprising that if he told his white house counsel -- it's ridiculous. he talked to him for 5 minutes in his office. why the heck is he recusing them? he may be told mcginnis -- it didn't go anywhere. but this was leaked it tonight. another leak out of the doj. your reaction? >> turning the page. but at the time this happened i thought that sessions's recusal was too broad and an overreaction because it didn't comply with the regulations of the justice department, which are the same ones that sort of apply to mueller as well. i know everybody wants to look at this as an investigation. president trump has to look at this as this affects my ability to govern. that's why the special counsel is such a terrible institution and it's been a terrible institution to every president of either party.

>> laura: i think there's a lot to do -- everyone says russia is the bogeyman. every time someone says russia, i say china. china is a much bigger threat to the united states. i think there are times we could triangulate china with russia and now we are not doing that. i think that we are not doing a lot of things we could do to put pressure on china to be more helpful. i want to ask about the fbi thing. lily color reports today that they are afraid they are not going to get whistle-blower protection inside the doj, apparently many of them are worried about the politicization of the fbi. >> don't know. >> laura: there witnessing it. they are not about trump. they are experiencing it. >> they certainly won't will he whistle-blowing protection and if they don't -- they should not be concerned about that and if the congress wants to hear from them, they can simply invite them or issue a subpoena for them and they will be heard. >> laura: fantastic as always,

both of you. by the way, abc is showing their intolerance after roseanne crosses the line. is this the best way to deal with racially-tinged remarks by a celebrity? we had to deal with spam, fake news, and data misuse. that's going to change. from now on, facebook will do more to keep you safe and protect your privacy. because when this place does what it was built for, then we all get a little closer.

>> laura: abc canceled the hit sitcom "roseanne" today after a series of bizarre tweets from the show's start earlier this morning. they included a racist remark about valerie jarrett, top advisor to president obama. she apologized profusely after she was severely criticized but that wasn't enough to save her show. valerie jarrett responded on nbc tonight. >> i think we have to turn it into a teaching moment. i'm fine. i'm worried about all the people out there who don't have a circle of friends and followers will come right to their defense. the person who was walking down the street who's minding their own business and they see somebody cling to their purse but want to cross the street.

>> laura: we are joined by alveda king, former member of the georgia house of representatives. the niece of martin luther king. i went to start with you because this was a breakneck speed cancellation of the most popular network television show of the season. a huge smash hit. she apologized, but the comments in the eyes of a lot of people were pretty inexcusable to say the least. >> you know, this actually is a teachable moment. i'm 67 years old and i do use social media, but i try to stop and may be pray or think or consider what i'm about to tweet or put on facebook or instagram or linkedin or any of those because people will hear that or see that or read that and as you say, roseanne's remarks move

like lightning. they just move everywhere and then abc responded and i believe appropriately. saying we just have to stop the show. there has to be a message that this is not what we are about. i believe that it is a teachable moment. unfortunately for roseanne herself. >> laura: i have a question about this. there seems to be no possibility of redemption in certain cases. you have redemption for joy behar. let's remind everyone what she said not so long ago. >> it's one thing to talk to jesus. it's another thing when jesus talks to you. >> exactly! that's different! >> that's called mental illness if i'm not correct. >> laura: andrea mitchell posed this very odd question today, let's watch. >> what you have to do on social media to get fired from a top

rated show on an american broadcast network? >> laura: given her passed comments about homosexuals it was kind of ironic. >> a lot of commentators and comedians have survived these offensive comments when they have apologized. different one roseanne bart touched race. if this was a spectacular self immolation. a nanosecond abc pulling the plug. it cost abc a lot of money by the way. roseanne said she was on top of the world and continue to spew anger. >> laura: you see the double standard. christians are mocked and ridiculed, and entire classes people ridiculed. someone is was an apology, maybe makes a phone call and career preserved. >> in america right now the issue of race has reached a fever pitch boiling points. if we have gotten the message yet from my uncle for example,

reverend martin luther king jr., we must learn to live together as brothers or perish together as fools, we are not understanding that we are one race, one human race so we are still in these race wars and battling. it's just an absolute terrible thing to take a racial slur and kind of throw it out there like that. and i understand that. however, i believe that we all as human beings, red-blooded human beings, our skin color really doesn't define us, it's a character that does. we are not color-blind. we can see ethnicity and we should because if we ignore or say we can't see skin color and we can't see the oppression and the wrongdoing that happens even down to the little babies in the womb all the way to all people. so fighting over skin color really is the problem but that's where we are right now and that's why i say it's a teachable moment. the racism really does have to go and we really have to begin to regard and respect each other as human beings.

>> laura: hear, hear. did abc not know though what they were getting with roseanne? venture was comments in "the new york times" is that you can't control roseanne. let's get how we end on this. many who have tried and failed. she's the one and only. >> abc knew exactly what it was getting with roseanne. she has been spreading conspiracy theories about 9/11 to nazis for many years. it was a gamble that she would zipper left and it did create a funny show. touch a lot of people in the country but abc cannot claim to be blindsided. there's one more point here. i was just waiting, counting down cnn's don lemon. roseanne at president trump. >> laura: they are putting it altogether. >> even valerie jarrett was taking the high road and she was sort of blindsided here. this has nothing to to do with donald trump. the mainstream media turned every negative controversy into a trap story. >> laura: what do you think?

what do you think about tying this to donald trump, which is what people are doing in tweets. the guy from scandal, actor joshua molina said abc is greater than g.o.p. others tweeting similar things, donald trump created this atmosphere for someone like roseanne to tweet that thinking she probably could get away with it. >> i believe roseanne perhaps. as i say, teachable moment. just thought she could say or do whatever she thought. >> laura: but did donald trump create the atmosphere? >> no, no, no. no he did not. i voted for donald trump. i'm not a racist. >> laura: i think that's obvious. >> we are not racist. to tie this one particular act from one particular person and say that it's donald trump -- president donald trump's fault, that's just not true. i think that we should not do that. >> laura: will someone else pick up the show? >> i think it's very hard to

come back from this kind of radioactive controversy. >> laura: so no one will pick up the show? the most popular show of the year. no one will pick it up? any of the cast and characters? they are all out of jobs. >> some of the people were saying they were leaving. that's the sad thing here. with this self-destructive act, all the writers and tape editors and people who would not be so easy for them to find jobs, they'll get -- >> laura: it's a shame. i select one minute of it. people really liked the show. it's a television show. life will go on. thank you so much, both of you. in another issue that raises questions about race relations up next, starbucks just made their employees spend the afternoon if they secretly harbor recent sentiment. i have the briefing book. i kid you not. when we come back. very, very tough on bacteria, yet it's very gentle on the denture itself. polident's 4 in 1 cleaning system consists

of 4 powerful ingredients that work together to deep clean your denture in hard to reach places. it kills 99.99% of odor causing bacteria and it helps to remove stains. polident should be the first choice of every person that wears a denture, to clean their denture.

>> laura: all 8,000 company-owned starbucks closed for three hours today so that 175,000 employees could receive unconscious bias training. the company recently announced that it stores would be open to all, even those who do not make a purchase. the new policy was in response to all the bad publicity after a philadelphia store manager called police last month to arrest to african-american men who did not make a purchase. instead of unconscious bias training, what starbucks employees have been better served as some critics claim by learning how to maybe run

homeless shelters? let's discuss this with fox news contributor caldwell and democratic strategist michael starr hopkins. okay, i actually have the booklet. do you see it? and its tab. it's actually fun. it stabbed. one of my sources is a starbucks employee and he actually said that people at his starbucks were -- african-americans, hispanics and himself and they were laughing through this book. look, i think people make a lot of money and racial bias training in all these diversity training, make a lot of money, but some of it has gone too far. i want to share some of it with you. you can react to this. here we go. ground rules. what makes me me and you you? that's the first part of this book. it says similarities bind us together, yes. being able to perceive what makes us unique and different from each other gives us the

gift of seeing each other as full human beings. so you have to listen respectfully, speak your truth, honor other people's truths. we are kind of behind the times on the full screens, but you get the point. there are all sorts of questions about noticing your racial identity. >> what's interesting to me, tmz reported that some employees from the session felt that it didn't bridge the gap. they felt that some of the questions didn't make a lot of sense and some people were uncomfortable, black, white employees alike. for me, to be clear, there is a need for training. you have to have diversity training, that's good. but this antibias training by starbucks is meant to prevent bias from one group in that starbucks. they want to make sure that they can continue to protect that bottom line and have people come in and patronize their stores.

we saw the very beginning that there were protests, there were people saying i will never go into a starbucks again. starbucks heard this and decided to put on what some employees have called a show. because if they were really serious about this particular training that would have done it way before this incident occurred as a number of companies have already done. i believe united airlines was one of them. a number of other companies that put on training similar to this. >> laura: it seems like people should just be respectful to one another no matter who you are, and where you come from. have clear policies. the poor employees. other employees, customers complaining because you can't get into the bathroom. people sitting there all day with their bags. if you said no one is happy, even some of the employees who were taking part of this training. >> everyone should respect each other. unfortunately that's not the

world we live in. it's not a situation that was created overnight. starbucks isn't going to solve that with three hour training. i do have to appreciate that he was willing to shut the store down for a couple of hours and take a swipe at addressing the issues. i think far too often in this country we are afraid to talk about race and afraid to deal with race. this is an attempttha else is bs th a tchable moment. >> laura: lets go through some of the recollections and reflections in the training manual that i have tabbed like i'm back in law school. i recall when you first experience to your racial identity, you noticed your racial identity, you felt your accent impacted people's perception of your intelligence or competence. at my friends in the bronx don't like that one. you altered your communication style, dial it up or dial it down. after we have full screen on this to put up? had a senior role model in your organization with a similar

racial identity as your own, or when you went to work with your natural hair without comments or questions from others. a friend said that particular last one seemed like it was kind of almost unfairly directed toward one minority group and then that started a conversation apparently at that particular starbucks. >> i was talking about this on my instagram and i encourage everybody to join me there. >> nice plug. >> look, i'm going to plug. i'm going to self promote. certainly. from what you've just read, i can tell what people were certainly uncomfortable with this conversation. there are some legitimate issues to be discussed. putting things out there, there is potential for people to be biased against you if you feel a particular way about how you deal with your colleagues, whether they be -- those are conversations that necessarily

should be had in a group setting of three or four people and reviewed by other folks. so when it comes to this training you've got to make sure that you are not providing more opportunities for people to be biased agast each other. >> laura: michael, i think the problem is people are probably afraid even in this setting to say anything. i think everyone is afraid to say almost everything these days about -- everything is misconstrued. they are afraid to complement someone, afraid to hug someone could buy at a going away party. everyone is afraid. i sense this everywhere. no one wants to have an honest conversation. maybe this will help, i don't know. >> i think that's true but i think that's why we all have to choose our worlds carefully. i think no question in these biased trainings is going to be perfect but i think what it does acknowledge is that we all, every ethnicity, every group has something that they are insecure about, something that makes them unique. so when we point that out that we all can at least get to the same starting point and be able to have what is supposed to be an uncomfortable conversation.

>> laura: maybe just sometimes have a great cup of coffee. >> i do love some coffee. the one thanks so much. we will tell you why the drug cartels love states where pot has been legalized. you will see it for yourself. b. b. auto insurance, homeowner's insurance, life insurance policies. knowing that usaa will always have my back... that's just one less thing you have to worry about. i couldn't imagine going anywhere else. they're like a friend of the family. we are the cochran family, and we'll be usaa members for life. save by bundling usaa home and auto insurance. get a quote today.

>> laura: i thought legalizing marijuana was supposed to take organized crime out of the pot business. news flash, it is not. a startling report from nbc news this morning reveals that foreign cartels embrace homegrown marijuana and pot-legal states. the reason is simple. according to colorado sheriff bill elder they have found that it is easier to grow and process marijuana in colorado and then ship it throughout the united states than it is to bring it in from mexico or cuba. federal officials say the chinese, cuban and mexican drug rates have purchased or rented hundreds of homes in california, colorado and washington where lacks pot laws provide cover for cartel. is it time to admit that legalized pot has failed? here to debate the question is mason, a spokesman at the marijuana policy project. joining us from denver. mason, it's great to see you. this is pretty wild. we have chinese, cuban, and

mexican mafia/cartel folks renting properties in colorado and california. to get their products out. how is this good for the states were pot was legalized? >> this is actually something that's been going on in every state around the country for decades and now in states like colorado and washington and california, what we are seeing is that the demand amongst the population in those states is being met by a new legal market where the product is being controlled, it's being grown and sold by licensed businesses and because there is still that demand in these other states that are not controlling marijuana, people are still producing it. >> laura: come on. mason, they are able to undercut the expense -- i've browsed in some of those stores in colorado. infused -- lavender-infused

edibles. this stuff is expensive. the cartels can come in, rent these places, undercut the legal pot and sometimes a lot more potent, believe it or not and a lot more dangerous. they flood the market with that, undercutting legal pot, not causing it to be a problem. >> i don't know where you are shopping for marijuana. >> laura: i'm not, thank you very much. i was seeing with all the stoners were buying. >> the fact is you can buy marijuana for the same or lower of a rate then you could on the street. no one is going out and calling around to illegal drug dealers are trying to get it on t street corner. imagine if alcohol was being sold illegally. >> laura: i get your point. let's hear what colorado law enforcement -- actually on the front lines here, what they are saying about this wonderful legalization experiment. >> the vast majority of people that we come across in these roads are cuban nationals. they are organized drug trafficking organizations who come to colorado to grow their marijuana. >> colombia's to cocaine as

colorado is to marijuana. >> do you think the state is turning a blind eye to that? >> i think they are absolutely turning a blind eye. >> this experiment has failed and i urge any state that is thinking about legalizing marijuana to learn by our mistakes. don't let this happen in other states. >> laura: final thought from you very quickly? >> there's a reason why mexican cartels and trainees drug rings are not renting out suburbs houses to bootleg it around the country. that's why donald trump supports letting states establish their own policies and is working with process. >> laura: we are will have you back. i i think it's a disaster. our kids will be on the front lines having to deal with this years from now. we will be right back.

>> laura: that's all the time we have tonight. follow me on twitter. shannon bream takes things from here with a great show. >> shannon: great to see her tonight. thank you so much. we began with a fox news alert. the president focusing on north korea and his barn burner national campaign rally. his top diplomat is getting ready to take on kim jong un's right-hand man in new york. infamous in north korea is the ex-spy chief who has had a bloodied hand and some of the rogue nation's most notorious attacks on south korea. in the president, the reason he was there in nashville, tennessee, tonight, supporting congressman marsha blackburn senate run. she will join us live. plus it was missing from the records and