are republicans and ex-crack heads. >> nobody watched. don't worry. let not your heart be troubled. the news continues with laura ingraham in d.c. tonight with the swamp. i'm the only one left in new york. how are you? >> laura: i'm thinking when you get home from the show, you dvr'd the emmys and you put your pink fluffy slippers and get your bonbons out. >> sean: that's really me -- my fluffy slippers. >> laura: your curlers in. >> sean: i open a beer and have you on tivo, the greatest invention ever, dvr. >> laura: would you know one of the shows that was nominated for an emmy? i wouldn't. i wouldn't do. you watch that stuff? >> sean: i hate these people. we're funny. nobody cares. hollywood is done. they're all done. >> laura: it's over. tv is over except on fox.

hannity, great show. >> sean: good to see you, laura, from the swamp, washington, d.c. >> laura: good evening from the swamp. i'm laura ingraham. this is "the ingraham angle." we have a vitally important hour for you tonight. late-breaking revelations and details on this kavanaugh story. another delay tonight in the kavanaugh vote. what is going on with this accuser and is an fbi investigation warranted? mercedes schlapp from the white house will be here. and former in tell chiefs are bristoling at president trump's decision to declassify important documents related to the russia investigation. what are they scared of? what are they hiding? and hollywood showing why once again, americans are watching less tv today. raymond arroyo is here with the

train wreck. but first, the rush to judgment, that's the focus of tonight's angle. listen closely to the media coverage of the 36-year-old accusation against supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh and the chorus is hard to miss. >> we have dr. ford's credible allegation. she has nothing to gain here. >> the story is credible. i don't think anyone doesn't believe her. >> i have every reason to believe she is a credible witness and her story is credible. >> i believe dr. ford, as i referred to her because she makes a very credible case. >> this is a situation where you have serious and credible allegations of rape. >> laura: now, we're led to believe that these are credible allegations. they're all reading from the same playbook. but given the age of the charges, what is the standard for credibility? has any evidence been produced? is there any corroborating witness?

so far, the answer is no. in fact, the only other person named in the accusation says it never happened. and given what we know of the accuser's political inclinations and left-wing causes, she could have a political axe to grind. the hyperbolic overreaction is somewhat reminiscent to what happened to the duke lacrosse team more than a decade ago. remember in 2006, the duke lacrosse team hired a pair of exotic dancers for a party at the rental house near the duke campus. one of the dancers, accused that one of the players raped her in a bathroom. the accused spoke to the media the moment he learned of the charges against him. >> first, i want to say i'm absolutely innocent of all the charges brought against me today. reed and collin are innocent of the changes brought against them. every member of the duke

university lacrosse team is innocent. you have all been told some fantastic lies. >> laura: well, the media seized on the story, spinning the stripper's credible accusation into a tale of white privilege, misogyny and pure evil. a media swarm and rush to judgment follows. the duke lacrosse coach that stood by his team in the face of these false accusations was fired for it and the young men reputations were dragged through the mud. only later did we discover that the three accused were not near the assault for it to have happened. one was at an atm machine nowhere near the home at the time. all three men were eventually cleared of the charges.

north carolina's then attorney general, roy cooper, said the men had been victims of a tragic rush to accuse and the failure to verify serious allegations. the crusading durham district attorney, mike fong that cooked evidence and raced to prosecute was disbarred and convicted for contempt for his actions. this is a cautionary tale as we weigh and determine the credibility of allegations against judge kavanaugh. at least the duke lacrosse case was contemporary when it comes to the timing with witnesses and a crime scene. 36 years later, ms. ford can't recall exactly when or where her alleged incident even took place. yet throughout the media, the drum beat goes on and on and there's an implicit message that senators dare not submit the accuser to any tough questioning as they did with anita hill. >> i remember sitting in that

hearing room watching anita hill endure character assassination day after day from republicans. >> they know they can't attack her directly and say she's making it up. that's what they did with anita hill in 1991. today, that probably wouldn't fly in a #metoo era. >> we must not repeat the mistake of the anita hill hearings. they were rushed and were a debacle. do we want to repeat that mistake? >> a debacle. i actually think the republicans have learned an important lesson from the anita hill hearings. they learned the only way to deal with last-minute he-said-she-said allegations is to refuse to be intimidated and to proceed fairly and methodically. the more serious question is, have the democrats learned any lessons about the toxicity of false charges coupled with a

media pile-on as demonstrated by the duke lacrosse and the clarence thomas cases. do they recognize a rush to judgment is not only unfair but destructive to the process and to individual lives? every accuser has a right to speak out but should be obliged to have his or her allegations challenged and sometimes aggressively so. the accused, meanwhile, should not be presumed guilty and he or she should have ever opportunity to clear his or her good name. now, chairman grassley has dedicated monday to a public hearing where both judge kavanaugh and his accuser, ms. ford, have been invited to appear. kavanaugh is ready. according to reports late tonight and a letter from her attorney, ms. ford wants the fbi to investigate her allegations before she agrees to appear. that was a late-breaking letter that her attorney submitted to the senate tonight. well, the question is, who will blink first?

listeners to my radio show had a message today for republicans who fail to stand up for kavanaugh and a fair process. >> if the republicans don't do this, i'll be voting, but i won't be voting for republicans. they've done this so many times. they have no backbone. they have no spine. >> i am infuriated. the reason we voted for trump is because of his outstanding scotus picks. if they don't push kavanaugh through, they will never seat another supreme court judge, especially a man. >> i have been traveling all over the country attending trump rallies. and i can tell you first hand if the republicans don't grow a backbone and support kavanaugh and take the vote now, they're going to have hell to pay come november. >> laura: in a way, this shouldn't be about the mid-terms. this should only be about whether judge kavanaugh is qualified to sit on the highest court of the land. we all have to ask ourselves the

question, should a charge made by one person decades late, impossible to prove or rebut be enough to damn the reputation of someone with decades of honorable public service? someone whose job is in government required no fewer than six previous fbi background checks? and shouldn't all of us, regardless of party, consider the poisonous precedent that that would set? and that's the angle. joining us now with reaction is attorney helge walker who worked with brett kavanaugh in the white house counsel's office along with nicole devord a former sex crimes prosecutor. nicole, i want to start with you. tonight the attorney for ms. ford has told the committee her client is not ready to proceed to testify on monday. this is 24 hours after she said

on the "today" show, that her kindly would do anything she needed to do to get her testimony forward. what is going on here tonight? >> you know, i think this is a really interesting wrinkle as well. the reality is that she basically went out on the air on a variety of tv appearances and essentially said, i want to testify. i want to tell my story. i don't think the vote should be had until i've had a chance to tell my story. and it sounds like what they're doing is giving her an opportunity to tell her story and now she says i want to wait. i think this is an interesting wrinkle. i think it's better for everyone if she has a chance to air what she has to say. the damage has been done. me might as well have an opportunity to refute it. this is the risk to bring allegations years and years after the incident. >> helge, also is the following program. in the 36 hours since her name became public, dr. ford has received a stunning amount of

support from the community, fellow citizens. at the same time her worst fears have been materialized. she's been the target of vicious harassment and even death threats, saying that her family was forced to relocate out of their house as a result of this. so she wants an fbi investigation of witnesses, i guess locations. how would this possibly proceed? we'll talk to an fbi former spokesman in a few moments. but how is this a process that could proceed at this point, helge? >> laura, already a chance for a fair investigation has been polluted. because as most lawyers and your viewers understand, you don't start with "washington post" expose and then investigate. the fbi investigates discreetly, quietly. all the witnesses, many of them, have had their opportunity to get the stories straight, delete social media accounts,

perhaps get rid of documents. that's not how investigations work. it's the process, the chance to have, actually, a fair investigation, where the fbi can do its job the way it's supposed to, has already been destroyed by the way the senate democrats have handled these allegations. >> laura: hillary clinton tonight said there should be a two-week pause. a two-week pause on this process. that should be enough to do an investigation. the accuser doesn't know where this occurred and the only other person that she can state that was at this party says it didn't happen. so what is there to investigate here? help me out. >> there a are a lot of missing elements of the story. that's why she was offered an opportunity to come forward and testify and tell her story, which is what her lawyer said she wanted to do. if you're going to make an allegation like this, you cannot -- you can't hide.

this is -- >> laura: it can't be hit and run. nicole, it can't be hit and run. i'm going to play this and then get to dianne feinstein. this is senator hiroto about whether the accuser needs to testify at all. >> why should we participate in a victimization of someone that has the courage to come forward? she's under absolutely no obligation to participate in a smearing -- guess who's perpetuating all of these kind of actions. it's the men in this country. i just want to say to the men of this country, shut up and step up. >> laura: nicole? your reaction to that. >> you know, the reality is, this is a decades-old criminal allegation. the statute of limitations of prosecution based on what i have heard, have passed. now what you have is somebody in the position of having to defend themselves against this quasi criminal charge all these years

later. i agree, maybe an investigation is appropriate. but there's no reason all of the questions that was set to take place couldn't take place anyway. >> laura: you've done the sex crimes prosecutions, have you ever come across something like this that was alleged so many years later with really very little in the way of details. >> a lot of times these cases are he said/she said cases. even something weeks in the past is a difficult situation for everybody involved. we're not talking weeks. we're talking years. we are talking decades. the fbi certainly should have the opportunity to go out and dig up whatever they can find. location, possible witnesses. it would help everybody to have verification of any of these details. but the fact of the matter is, they should still be able to proceed with questions. >> laura: all right, guys. it's not just brett kavanaugh the media is going after. it's anyone that dares to question his accuser's credibility.

>> in the end, the all-white and all-male members the judiciary committee attacked anita hill's credibility and thomas went on to be narrowly confirmed 52-48. there was a political backlash. the next year, 1992, the year of the woman. 24 women were elected to the house and four joined two others in the senate. >> laura: joining me is mercedes schlapp, director of strategic communications for the white house. thanks for coming in tonight. great to have you here. this is completely wild. you heard what we talked about. we now have senator blumenthal coming out saying the following. want you to react. >> i think the nomination should be withdrawn. the bar here is not whether you have not criminally assaulted someone. it's credibility, truth, -- trust, integrity. this nomination will not only cast a shadow over judge kavanaugh if he were ever to be

confirmed, it will also stain the united states supreme court irrepably. >> laura: mercedes? >> this is the most predictable play book for the democrats. the democrats have said from day one they won't be supporting kavanaugh. for a very long period of time they refused to take meetings with him. then they wait the last minute for senator feinstein to come up with this letter from this accuser on brett kavanaugh after we saw 32 hours of testimony, after they had closed committee hearings and after they have given him over 1,000 written questions. what are we seeing, laura? we're seeing the fact that none of this with regards to this accusation being made was brought up to the attention of judge kavanaugh. so it's very clear that the politics from the delay tactics of democrats came pushing forward. this is one more example from senator blumenthal not allowing this to be resolved in a sense that as we know judge kavanaugh has been very consistent in saying. i categorically deny this horrific accusation.

>> laura: you think about blumenthal and others like him, do you think they're really up at night worried about christine blasey ford? is this what they're worried about? protecting women in. >> what the democrats are worried about is that judge kavanaugh is incredibly qualified to be on -- >> laura: it's roe v. wade. >> it's not only that, but the fact that he will be that strict constitutionalist. that he is the one that will interpret the law, follow precedent and this idea that they feel like they're losing this battle. i feel that that is just unjust. because we know, laura, looking at the fact that you've had individuals from a variety of legal experts, the legal community supporting judge kavanaugh, knowing that he's well-respected in the legal circles, and the fact that they want to tear down his reputation, try to ruin his good name while this man, judge

kavanaugh has said i'm ready to testify today. >> laura: a lot of conservatives think they shouldn't have delayed it at all. the letter from the accuser's attorney tonight, deborah katz, as the judiciary has done before, an fbi investigation of the incident should be the first step in addressing the allegations. a full investigation by law enforcement officials will ensure that the crucial facts and witnesses in this matter are assessed in a nonpartisan manner and the committee is fully informed. she's not going to be testifying on monday, only when an investigation is conducted and underway. will the white house insist that this hearing go forward on monday? >> look, we're going to allow the senate judicialry committee to make these decisions. it's in their hands. with that being said, judge kavanaugh has said i will testify. >> laura: but this is a delay tactic and it's political now. what is the white house's political reaction to what is clearly a political move by the democrats and by her attorney who is a democrat activist?

>> it's incredibly disturbing that they keep stalling, that they keep waiting. >> laura: why do you think they're doing that? >> you know why they're doing this. they know that october 1, the supreme court convenes. they don't want brett kavanaugh to be confirmed. it's very clear what they're -- again, what i mentioned, what their play book here. beloved -- >> laura: they don't care. >> they don't care. he's someone with high integrity, someone that i personally worked with. laura, we were single. we were in an office together dealing with judicial nominees. he was professional, respectful to all women. it goes on and on. but yet, they are willing at the last minute to throw something out there to see if it sticks when they had over six weeks to bring this up. that's what is so disturbing. that's why it gets to the point that you have to realize they're trying to ruin judge kavanaugh. >> laura: is the white house prepared to insist to the senate or strongly recommend to the

senate to go forward with this monday hearing or just to convene a vote? >> the senate judiciary committee has to make that decision. we stood by judge kavanaugh. he will testify. >> laura: two weeks from now? >> we need to get this done. >> laura: mercedes, thanks for coming in. we're going to be watching very closely over the next few days to see how this develops with kavanaugh. brett kavanaugh's accuser is now demanding a full investigation by the fbi before testifying in front of the senate. and a former top fbi official is here to tell us why that is an absurd request. stay right there. [ upbeat music ]

i'm ready to crush ap english. i'm ready to do what no one on my block has done before. forget that. what no one in the world has done before. all i need access, tools, connections.

high-speed connections. is the world ready for me? through internet essentials, comcast has connected more than six-million low-income people to low-cost, high-speed internet at home. i'm trying to do some homework here. so they're ready for anything. >> laura: the uproar surrounding the brett kavanaugh nomination to the supreme court is taking yet another dramatic turn this evening. the lawyer for christine blasey ford says now that ford will not testify in front of the senate. that's a shock. i predicted that, without a full investigation by the fbi first. but just moments ago, chuck grassley, the ranking republican on the committee, just released a statement saying he will not move monday's date. yes! joining us now with reaction, former fbi national spoke person, john annerrelli. john, grassley did the right

thing. this is the worst gamesmanship i've seen when it comes to supreme court confirmation. but the idea that the fbi has a role here. hillary clinton said that there should be a two-week pause in the proceedings. so facts can be gathered, witnesses can be interviewed. the process should be slowed down. your reaction. >> well i think hillary would also like a recount if she could have one. but the reality is, former presidential candidates don't get to decide what the fbi does. the reality is, the fbi conducts national security investigations for these types of instances. that investigation has been completed. there was nothing derogatory found and that's why it's moved forward. to go back and do an investigation now would not serve any purpose for what the fbi does. >> laura: well, this has come up in the last 24 hours. because i think they got all ahead of themselves because this

woman comes out, makes this allegation, says she doesn't remember many details except apparently, what the judge allegedly did as a high school student. but doesn't remember where it was, when it was. but now, somehow, she wanted to testify 24 hours ago. 24 hours later, no, now it's hot potato ticket to the fbi. now, if you're an fbi official and you have stacks of stuff to do, are you now sent on a wild goose chase to look for a home for who has a pool and where was there a pool party 36 years ago? >> you know, something may have happened to this woman. we shouldn't discount that she has a memory of something, whether or not it involved judge kavanaugh or somebody else. it's been 36 years. memories fade. but more importantly, this is the type of crime, a sex offense that's being alleged and handled by local authorities. the fbi doesn't have jurisdiction.

for those cases. >> laura: a federal law enforcement official told fox tonight, it's totally inappropriate to demand that we use law enforcement resources to investigate a 36-year-old allegation when she won't go under oath and can't remember any key details like when and where it happened. >> law enforcement will investigate something if there's a cooperative witness. the first thing this person should do is go to the local police -- >> laura: you can't. the statute of limitations -- there's no complaint. >> in maryland, there still may be a statute of limitations. unless there's something that could be prosecuted, a prosecutor says, yes, we're going to -- >> laura: what prosecutor will take this case, john? come on. >> no one. >> laura: it's ridiculous. i'm sorry. you're being much more judicious. this is a late in the game allegation made after a guy has had six fbi background checks. his character has been attested

to by dozens and dozens of women who worked with him, dated him, went to college with him, and worked with him. i'm one of them. i've known him 28 years. what is happening and now these democrats out there saying we have to go to the fbi? i mean this -- can this get more ridiculous at this point? >> i want to be clear that i'm talking about the process. if you have a complaint, there's a method to do it. don't make the fbi your political animal to try to handle things the way your political party may want it to be. >> laura: thanks, john. in reaction to the accusations by christine ford against kavanaugh, we heard a constant refrain. >> she's taken a polygraph. she's a credible person. these are serious allegations. >> i think it's amazing that she passed that polygraph. i would love it if judge kavanaugh wants to get on the -- we call it being on the box. >> we're immediately questioning her credibility despite the fact that she's passed the polygraph test. >> laura: but are poll grap

polygraphs taken seriously? joining us with answers, thomas mariello from the dod and a current processer of criminalology in maryland and peggy nance who is herself a rape victim and she has serious questions aboutless ford's claims. thanks for being here today. thomas, i want to begin with you. the reliability of polygraphs. because a lot of people i think out there hear, she passed a lie detector test in august. what does that mean and how important would that be even if this were a prosecutable crime? >> it means absolutely nothing. first of all, we have to understand the polygraph is not a lie detector. it has never been and hopefully never will be. i never used the world pass or fail. i either say successful or not successful. but when somebody says they passed a test, that simply means that they didn't react to certain questions that were asked. you have to ask what were the questions? how were they asked?

how were they formulated? what did the examiner say to you before the test began? all those things affect how a person's going to react. more importantly, what is the reaction? it's not a lie. the reaction is simple. your sympathetic nervous system hearing a question and deciding whether it's threatening or not. it could be threatening for a lot of reasons other than you're going to tell the truth or not. >> laura: peggy, setting aside the polygraph issue that we just demonstrated clearly is not some big plus or minus in this case, you have serious doubts about the case as it's alleged, the incident as alleged. why? why? >> first, may i correct you? i am a victim of physical assault and attempted rape. and it was over 20 years ago. but i can tell you i remember every single detail. you know, i think probably something did happen to this

woman. but we should all want justice. there's no justice in destroying a man's reputation, destroying his career based on allegations that, you know, are unprovable. so you know, all of this -- the democrats hope that this is more about gender identity politics. concerned women for american are still standing firmly behind judge kavanaugh. we will be there on monday in support of him, as we've been throughout this process. it has been a circus. i have watched as they have disrupted. activists have yelled and screamed and disrupted the decorum of the senate. i've seen women parading around as handmaids. believe me, grown men dress as human condoms. it's been a circus and an outrage and this is really damaged the credibility and the dignity of the senate. >> laura: i want to play another sound bite. this goes back to what john was

talking about. about this idea that, well, we'll wait two weeks. we'll do an raeinvestigation bye fbi. anybody that doesn't think an investigation should go forth is clearly anti-victim. you don't want women to be hurt. i mean, it makes no sense. we want her to be heard. she can be heard monday. i think she could have been heard today or maybe tomorrow or friday. but she could be heard monday. she doesn't want to be heard. kamala harris came out today and said this. let's watch. >> i believe that the fbi to your point should be compelled to do its job in terms of doing -- completing their background investigation. and that's not being done. >> laura: they haven't completed the background investigation. i want to go to john again on this. because, you see what's happening. the senators are lining up, pointing at the fbi. so it's either well, she pass

a lie detect test. she's representing all women of have been victims of sexual assault. she's a representative of women. again, god bless whatever happened to her. now it's fbi do your job and anyone that stands in the way, you're part of the problem. you're anti-woman, anti-sexual abuse victim. >> the fbi's job is to conduct a national security investigation which has been done. it's not taken a position on women issues, political issues, et cetera. and to be ordered to go do something that is out of the realm of what they're supposed to be doing is politicizing the bureau. >> laura: remember, dianne feinstein said she can't even say that everything is truthful that the accuser is accusing brett kavanaugh of. everybody, thank you so much for being here tonight. the democrats are in a total frenzy over the kavanaugh accusations that we've been talking about. so naturally they're a playing the same standards to the domestic abuse allegations

against congressman keith ellison, right? don't held your breath. that's next. - [narrator] do you have less energy than you used to? - when i was young, into my teens and when i went into college and played college tennis, i could play all day long and never get tired. as i got older, i started noticing a change in energy. - [narrator] scientist have discovered that after you reach age 40, your body produces less vital nitric oxide than it did when you were in your 20s. with less nitric oxide you have less energy. so how do you get your energy back? take one atom of nitrogen and bond it with one atom of oxygen.

boom. you just created nitric oxide, the miracle molecule your body needs to help support heart health and help give you more energy. now you can jumpstart your nitric oxide levels with the circulation superfood of superbeets by humann. based on nobel prize award-winning research recognizing nitric oxide as an important signaling molecule for heart health, superbeets uses the dietary nitrates found in nutrient-rich beets to help your body generate more vital nitric oxide, fueling your energy and supporting healthy blood pressure. - it really has dramatic effects, not only on the athlete, but the average individual that's just trying to get through the day. you just feel better, you feel more alert and you have more energy. - it's not the type of energy that you feel great for about 30 minutes and then you take a nose dive. i mean, this is sustained energy that gets you through the rest of your day. - [narrator] you would have to eat over 90 fresh beets to get the functional benefits found in one canister of superbeets. - [narrator] call now to find out how you can get a 30-day supply of superbeets free with your first order.

call the number on your screen now to take advantage of this limited-time offer. - what you've just put in your body is actually going to help you sitting at your desk for eight hours. it's this long-lasting battery life. - [narrator] for a free 30-day supply of superbeets with your first order, call the number on your screen. that's the number on your screen now.

>> makes me go back to 1999 when >> makes me go back to 1999 when dianne feinstein and every other democrat refused to read my deposition to the independent counsel. they wouldn't have nothing to do with it. that just shows you the difference in the double standard that existed back then and still does today. >> laura: that was juanita broaddrick when dealing with the democrats when she brought claims of rape against former president bill clinton. and sadly, it seems not much has changed. while democrats howl for answers from brett kavanaugh in an opaque charge, they're not asking the same of dnc co-chair keith ellison. last month his former girlfriend alleged that ellison sent her threatening text messages and once screamed obscenities at her as he dragged her off a bed by her feet.

no calls for his resignation. the investigation the dnc said it was launching has gone silent. joining us now with reaction, monica crowley from the center for policy research and anthony tahl, an attorney and democratic strategist. let's go to you first, monica. it's wild to go back and think about what was said back in '98 and so forth. but tonight, hillary clinton was asked about due process regarding sexual assault allegations by rachel maddow. let's watch. >> have we learned anything over the years about due process, not just for the accusers but also for the accused? >> well, i think you have to take each of these situations sort of on their own merits. >> laura: monica? >> that's rich coming from mrs. clinton, whose own husband was alleged to have raped juanita

broaddrick, my good friend, and assaulted any number of other women. she stood by her man and threatened to discredit and smear any of those women that came forward to accuse her husband. look, laura, this is the rot of hypocrisy. democratic party of today is now back to being the party of bill clinton. full of hypocrites. you just saw the case of keith ellison. and you know, in that case we've got police reports, we've got an alleged video and little to no media coverage. so what we now see is the democratic party is willing to shield potential women abusers in the name of politics, ideology and promotion. >> laura: anthony, this is karen monahan, her comment on whether her party, democratic party, believed her allegations. she said, "no, they don't. i've been smeared, threatened, isolated from my own party.

i provided medical records from 2017 stating on two different doctors visits, i told them about the abuse, who did it. my therapist released records stating that i've been dealing and healing from the abuse." that's 2017. it's not 36 years ago. not a peep from the democrats who care so much about women, anthony. >> well, i think one of the problems with her story is that, you know, there's a lot of democrats that don't believe her story. i believe there's something about some text messages and the text messages haven't been there and haven't been supported. with regard to kavanaugh in this case, the accuser does have a corroborating witness with regard to the therapist which is from 2011. so i think that's one of the problems -- >> laura: anthony. wait a second. 2017. she talked to a therapist in 2017. medical records that were released, doctors notes and she said she's been smeared including apparently by democrats. he said well, the problem is

democrats don't believe her. no kidding that goes to the point that some allegations have merit. the allegations against democrats have no merit and the allegations against brett kavanaugh from 36 years ago should end a supreme court nomination. i mean, elson is in congress. >> well, he has a two-year term. and this guy is going up for a term that's going to last -- >> laura: so that's it? >> laura, as a criminal defense attorney, trust me, i believe that just kavanaugh should have the right and i believe that everything should come out and he should be heard. i'm all in favor of that. but i hope at one point in time that he realizes or he feels that all of the people whether they're poor, white, blacks or hispanics that come before him, now he sees how they feel to be accused of something and have a whole system come at him and whether it's fair or unfair. this is a good thing for him to

learn. >> laura -- >> laura: oh, my god, anthony. i can't believe you said that. a good thing for him to learn? it's a complete utter outrage. monica? sorry. that's ridiculous. >> to be clear about keith ellison's, he's number 2 at the dnc and he's currently running to be the attorney general of a major state, minnesota, and he probably has higher political aspirations than that. so the idea that the democrats are protecting him while running wild on brett kavanaugh is a disgrace. laura, this is all about the broader war on donald trump and his agenda. brett kavanaugh is just the latest proxy in this war. to take down this president, undermine his agenda, make it still born and destroy all of his appointees and anybody that dares to serve this president or to be appointed by this president. it's about roe v. wade of course, but also about undermining and ultimately taking down this president. >> laura: anthony, do you think the accuser should be testifying on monday? her lawyer said she would

testify yesterday, do anything to get her story now but now she's not testifying monday. >> well, yeah, it was my understanding that she was going to testify. i think she should testify. but now she's saying she wants the fbi to investigate this situation. and remember, this is not unlikely for victims to come forth years later. that happens all the time. i believe that kavanaugh has a right to put his side of the story out and i believe she has a right to put her side of the story out. the one thing that we need to remember is that this is a lifetime appointment. >> laura: we get that. when you say that's what this is about. most people will never get to the bottom of this. this is about the supreme court. it's not about whether you're protecting women or a woman's issue, this is just rank politics. and i think the more that we just say that, and dispense of this idea that we're going to find out what happened at a pool party in 1983, it's just easier

for everybody. it's about whether you're going to have a lifetime appointment on the court, period. i don't think it's about women. otherwise they would be concerned about keith ellison. thanks so much. we're out of time. we're going to go to black # space. critical russia probe documents ordered declassified by president trump set to become public at any moment. we've got new details on the political earthquake that may follow, in a moment. and the emmy awards hit religion and conservatives. what a shock. the fallout with raymond arroyo, coming up. to find the loan they needed. our intelligent technology makes connecting with a lender fast and free. get a lender decision in minutes and - with approval - receive your money in as little as one business day. lend genius is the genius way to get money for debt consolidation, vacations, paying off bills or home improvement. be a genius. find a loan with lendgenius.com.

>> laura: it was big news last night. president trump taking matter into his own hands with regard to the declassification of materials related to the russia investigation. this is hot. he calls for these documents to be declassified. it's already sent shock waves through the intel communities, both past and present. one of the president's biggest critics levelled this challenge. on andrea mitchell's show. >> christopher wray, dan coates, rod rosenstein should push back against any directive that is going to have negative impact on our capabilities as well as the investigation. if mr. trump and the white house does not relent, i think they have some decisions to make, whether or not they're just not going to follow that direction and be fired, or to resign. >> laura: so brennan is telling people to practice rank insubordination. okay.

joining us now to discuss, former house oversight committee chair, jason chaffetz. he's the author of the book "deep state." how an army of bureaucrats are working to destroy the trump agenda. jason, this is wild. it's good timing for your book out today. here we have brennan saying what he said. clapper comes out tonight on another show and says it's unethical for the president to declassify this material. what of this? >> the president of the united states, donald trump, he is the only constitutional officer that the people have entrusted to make these decisions. not these other yahoos. i know he was talking about revoking their security clearances. i hope that's already happened. if they need another excuse, there it is. the president is pushing for openness, accountability, everything the people want. why are the democrats so scared of this? because their little charade is going to be exposed.

>> laura: adam schiff came out today. he talked about a red line. let's watch. >> this is what the director of the fbi, the republican appointed director of the fbi, christopher wray has told us in terms of a red line and it should be treated as a gang of eight level. this is what the deputy attorney general appointed by the administration, the republican president has told us. and it ought to be respected. >> the head of law enforcement, the head of the intelligence is the president of the united states, adam schiff. when you put out your document saying that devin nunes released his moment memo, a few months a? that the world would burn to a crisp? it didn't happen. you have no credibility, adam schiff. none. >> laura: what is interesting

about this is that we have learned things in drips and drabs about the insurance policy and then we learned that there was no evidence of russian collusion, to even kickoff the fisa warrant application. but they had to scramble. then there were media leaks. there was a strategy of media leaks. a constant feedback loop to indicate more of a need for more surveillance and more of an investigation. and moving on to mueller. i think the more we learned about this, jason, the uglier it gets. i think that's what brennan is sweating about. >> his little charade is about to be exposed. they all thought that hillary clinton would become the president of the united states, all of this would be covered up and we would never hear about this. then the unthinkable happened. a transformative president, an unconventional president with trump and now they're scrambling. you have director comey advocating for democrats. because in this election they want to shut all this investigation down. they want to shut it down. that's what would happen if adam schiff became the head of the intel committee as opposed to a

devin nunes. >> laura: exactly. thanks so much, jason. last night's emmys show how far hollywood has moved away from america. but one unplanned moment stole the show. what is it? arroyo here to explain next. hey, what are you guys doing here? we're voya. we stay with you to and through retirement. so you'll still be here to help me make smart choices? well, with your finances that is. we had nothing to do with that tie. voya. helping you to and through retirement. are you ready to take your then you need xfinity xfi.?

a more powerful way to stay connected. it gives you super fast speeds for all your devices, provides the most wifi coverage for your home, and lets you control your network with the xfi app. it's the ultimate wifi experience. xfinity xfi, simple, easy, awesome.

>> laura: last night hollywood celebrated television and themselves at the emmys. along the way they bash religion and conservatives and revealed something important. for the grisly details, we're joined by raymond arroyo. fox news contributor, best selling author of "the will wilder" series. what happened at the weird and wacky emmys? >> nbc gave the producing responsibility to lorne michaels who oversees snl. this was like an extended "saturday night live" skit. alec baldwin, kate mckinnon, they were all there. they opened with this self-aware done deaf odd song about how diverse tv has become and how they saw it. -- they solved it. watch this. >> diversity is not a problem in hollywood anymore? >> no. we solved it. >> that's wonderful news. ♪ we solved it we have got within the times ♪ ♪ there's room for all of our

voices ♪ ♪ we welcome asian people, we gave you that one show ♪ ♪ and who can put it the amazing an draw -- sandra oh ♪ >> it helps when you can sing when you do a musical. >> laura: that is the worst. oh, my gosh. >> prime time television. michael shea, one of the coast hosts and the weekend update guys, they were the official hosts. chase said something that you never mentioned in an award ceremony. religion and politics. watch this. >> my mother is not watching. >> what? >> well, she said she doesn't like watching white award shows because you don't thank jesus enough. >> that's true. >> the only people -- the only white people that thank jesus are republicans and ex-crackheads. >> i don't have anything to say. i wasn't expecting this. i'm so grateful. this is amazing.

i want to curse right now. this is good. thank you, jesus. >> i don't even believe in god but i'm going to thank her tonight. # i'm so blessed, i'm so blessed. >> laura: sandy newton there demonstrates how out of touch this community is with the viewers. you don't disparage god and you don't mention jesus, politicize him and mention crack heads. it just -- it fell flat, the whole evening. when betty white, who is 96 years old becomes the highlight of this thing for no reason except for the fact she's betty white, you know you're in trouble. there was moment you will like. michael chase awarded an emmy to some tv black legends that were not recognized in the past. this was actually kind of funny.

watch. >> ms. marla gibbs, we would like to present you this reparations emmy. your role as florence the made is where i got fired from every service job i had. >> thank you, i think. >> is this the real emmy? >> the real thing what do you think? >> i cannot believe this. i just got one word for this thing. >> say it. >> it's dynamic. >> no dynamite that time. this was funny. you know why this works? there were actual legends in tv that we recognized. the rest of the show is populated by people -- and, look, it's not the fault of the performers but television is so shattered. it's all of these streaming shows that none of views time to watch. >> i don't even know who michael chase is. marla gibbs, the jeffersons was one of the funniest shows. i still watch it. you gave it to me. >> hilarious. you know who stole the show this year? >> what?

>> a marriage proposal by the director of the oscars. it was the take-away of the evening. lowest ratings of all time. >> laura: a shock. attack trump, religion. >> they should have more wedding engagements. >> laura: except right here. a special announcement about tomorrow's show. .. there are 16 million children

struggling with hunger in america. this is a serious problem, but one we can solve. visit feedingamerica.org to help. together we can solve hunger. together, we're feeding america. >> before we go, an important note about tomorrow night's show, an exclusive interview with mike pompeo. we will ask him about china, north korea, a lot of

developments on both fronts and an undercover video that was revealing an employee talking about a resistance movement inside the department. shannon bream and the fox news at night team on all the new details on brett kavanaugh and a lot more. >> every 5 minutes something new. thank you. moving to the fox news alert, a new twist in the brett cavanagh confirmation battle as his accuser says she will not testify that to the senate judiciary committee before a thorough fbi investigation. the republicans say they are trying to get to the bottom of her claim, then accused democrats of refusing to cooperate. brit hume has analysis and we will hear from a planned parenthood representative about whether this is about something else, abortion. democrats when the intel community to