sure you pay all your taxes and follow the rules and laws. the other thing we have to learn here is we have dual justice systems in america. the funny russian dossier is a story tonight. i have a great weekend and thanks for joining us tonight, laura is next. >> laura: i'm laura ingraham and this is "the ingraham angle "the ingraham angle." we will methodically break down everything you need to know about the mueller sentencing memos. we will also plan on getting into some other stories later tonight. hollywood a list are kevin hart from hosting the oscars over the remarks that he made over a decade ago. it is a pc culture killing entertainment and comedy? raymond arroyo will be here and show us one of the more repulsive toys of the season, friday follies, and how weed is taking over every part of

america. we begin talking about the big push for legalized medical marijuana and how that somehow morphed into pot being delivered right to your front door on command. and later in the show, i will take on the lefty lawmaker pushing for this new delivery service. but first, this is a fox news alert. tonight, bob mueller's transport team, they have delivered three court filings involving everything we need to know tonight about all these filings shedding light on the case. and i wanted to go straight to our panel. and byron york, chief political correspondent, fox news contributor and a man who

overlapped with paul manafort on drums team. joe joe did java come up to wath reaction on the other networks tonight, you might has well have thought that donald trump came out in a hammer and sickle t-shirt. but what did we actually discover? let's start with the cohan then filing. >> we learned that there was no evidence again of russian collusion with the trump campaign and certainly nothing with the president personally. we learned that michael: is a rather unscrupulous individual who did some pretty sleazy deals after the campaign. but in fact there is no suggestion whatsoever that the president did anything wrong. or committed any crimes or

certainly, i had any contact with russians. lots of hype, lots of sound, lots of noise and lots of drama but no substance in terms of the president of the united states. >> laura: someone jumped on this part of the special counsel's filing, and we will read it to the end and you can make your own conclusion as to why some media organizations are leaving it off. the defendant also provided information about attempts by other russian nationals to reach the campaign. for example in or around the 15th, cohen received contact information for and spoke with a russian national who claimed to be a trusted person who could offer the campaign, political synergy, and a synergy on government level. cohen however did not follow up on this. that's one of the small pieces of information about russia that

is being seized upon by people like, i think maggie haberman and others. nothing happened with that. >> nothing happened with that and it also didn't happen with several other contacts or alleged contacts between russians and members of the campaign. we don't know who this russian national laws, we don't know who was going on. clearly michael: wasn't interested. i will tell you though i think what's going to come out of what has happened today is a pivot from talking about russia to talking about campaign finance violations and i think that's in the michael cohen stuff. >> laura: this is the kind of hyperbolic over-the-top commentary that we heard, just about that one russian contact that was never followed up on. watch. >> synergy -- >> i think it's a hybrid business school term for

collusion. >> is a hollywood term. >> this goes back to why this is politically very damaging to the president. >> we knew this couldn't stick. >> i think this could stick, yes. >> now "the new york times" is coming up with new adjectives. love it. >> while there is something called conspiracy and of course that's always whether cohen or trump transitional officials were in league with the operatives. now that has yet to be proven. >> if that call happened and we assume it did it, there's nothing wrong with that. you don't think russia or china or saudi arabia is trying to get into contact with all these campaign officials, you bet they are. always trying to reach out and make contact. if the call was made there is no crime there. what's the crime? >> there is a law which prohibits foreign context and all of these campaigns are very well aware of what the ramifications are. >> laura: what law are you

talking about? >> that the presidential candidate cannot accept help from foreign governments. so if there was help from a foreign government, we couldn't prove it. >> there was an offer by an individual who claimed that he was trusted and basically swatted away by michael: . big deal. >> 's supposedly michael: -- there will be all this inquiry into the trump tower. when michael: cohen get sentenl have another chance to help. >> laura: he was described as not a cooperating witness, and the southern district of new york basically kicked him to the curb. that's not on what you are talking about, and that's not the part you are talking about. i want to go to corey on this.

i've heard this time and again, collusion, collusion. i have no doubt that there are a lot of countries trying to effect our election, and, how is this russian collusion. >> what people forget is barack obama was the president of the united states and no one talked about -- donald trump was a private citizen. he had nothing to do with the integrity of the ballot process or the integrity of how the election was going to be administered. that all fell on the administration and there was no collusion, there was no cooperation and there was no coordination between anybody on the trump campaign. >> the word conspiracy was thrown all around. in major american newspapers, the word conspiracy was used.

michael: had nothing to do with the campaign, he wasn't a campaign employee, didn't have -- a trump organization employee of which literally he was 20 floors apart from where the campaign was. he couldn't make decisions on behalf of the campaign. >> i want to make a note that cohen has not charged anybody with taking part in a criminal conspiracy. i think we have an interesting full screen and i want to read this for did jen about. there is a semimedia narrative that proves that trump had also lied about his dealings, given his repeated claims about his presidency and campaign that he had no deals with russia.

even a liberal slate publication in november said in the strictest sense, none of these denials appear to represent a lie as far as we know because of trump's adherence to present tense verbs. i have no dealings with russia, i don't do deals and i have no loans with russia but the statements serve to mislead people about trump's attempt to deal with russia and cohen. maybe there is more to learn, there's not much coming about but liberals and opponents should brace themselves for another round of those pangs of disappointment. i thought that was a really good piece. the russian collusion, the word conspiracy -- when i see the word conspiracy out there, the generalists who know better, it's disgusting. they either don't know the law or they are purposely ignoring it. >> i think it's very important to underscore what byron just said. not a single charge in any of

the crimes that mueller has brought involve a conspiracy by anybody in the trump campaign, or trump himself, to deal with russians, russian governmental officials, russian businesspeople, russian political people, russian comedians, russian grocery store keepers, nothing involving a criminal conspiracy. in fact, all of the illusions to michael cohen's attempts or attempts to get to him by russians are simply described as things that happen. they are not described as parts of a crime. so the notion that there was some sort of conspiracy described in today's multiple pleadings is false reporting of the worst kind. it is hopeful reporting, anticipatory reporting, and it is not actual reporting. >> laura: alan dershowitz

weighed in tonight as well, he was on west tucker and david, i want you to react to this. >> the report set out as circumstantial case based on the line that is taking place, a circumstantial case for arguably political sins. but i don't see any crimes. collusion itself is not a crime, using information, given by russia to wikileaks would not be a crime unless the campaign participated with wikileaks in the hacking itself. there is no evidence to support that. >> laura: david, where is the russia crime >> that is one of the things that mueller was trying to find out from paul manafort. one of the reasons he said he was in breach was because he thought there were two things that paul manafort knew about and was he telling the truth about the other evidence. one was whether he had contacts with wikileaks, and the other

one was the trump tower meeting in new york city, they want and 2016 with kushner and donald trump jr. that's what mueller thinks the manafort knows more about than manafort is telling. that's what he says in breach. >> laura: i understand that but rudy giuliani -- >> that's not in any of the pleadings. what david just said is not anywhere in anything that was pleaded today. >> well, you can say that it's speculation but you wonder why mueller is saying that there is a breach. and you wonder what he's saying he has the breach all about -- and this whole constantine from

2004 and 2006, it had to do with making all that money over there and not reporting it. >> there is no such thing as a one time, and again, "new york times" as well, this is the russian ukrainian guy, nothing to do with donald trump, nothing to do with collusion and nothing to do with donald trump. but this has zero to do with russia trying to interfere with this election, working with donald trump to do it. >> that preceded his tenure at the trump campaign by a decade and what we have seen now is that the mueller investigators are taking those crimes, and they have no jurisdiction here.

they are looking at crimes ten years prior. >> >> laura: why did trump hire manafort? >> he was still doing things on the fax machine which was the way to do it in the 1980s and, you have to remember, it's when ted cruz was winning delegates even though he was losing states and they were concerned about a four fight. i didn't believe him then and i don't believe him now. >> this is a total time warp. >> laura: 70s, going back a long way. >> and they landed back together. >> let's touch on this issue of the campaign finance because that's the toughest for the president, and clearly the one

that will give him the most angina overnight because, michael cohen, as laid out in the pleading today, he does say or the prosecutor say as he confessed to in august, allegedly that trump directed the payments to the "national enquirer" and to stormy daniels, 150,130,000 respectively with the coordination and direction of individual number one. that's what the pleading said and you kind of see it there. that's a violation of the campaign finance laws. that's the allegation and you look at the statute, you can't use a company to make donations to the campaign. we flipped through the llc, and -- >> according to the federal chairman of the collection commission that was not a violation of the federal campaign finance laws. the use of a corporation would be but you would have to prove

that donald trump knew that the corporation was being used to do it. it was not legal to be used to pay hush money. the question was and either one of those scenarios as possible and therefore a jury would have to guess at that, not only that but there is no evidence that the president of the united states ordered that it be paid through a corporation, which is what would make it illegal. the payment itself would be perfectly proper. >> laura: so you are saying it's proper even though it's not disclosed? >> so you are saying it's proper, even if it's not disclosed. and speak 19 cap, i believe --

>> it only has to be disclosed if it is a personal campaign contribution by the president. if it is paid to keep the women silent, it is because he doesn't want to embarrass their family. >> laura: that's what cohen will say to get less jail time. that's what people are saying, he will foist some of the blame over to trump because you have to perry down the jail time. and this is what he had to say about the campaign finance. >> the big news tonight is not about michael cohen, it's not about paul manafort, but donald trump. for the first time you federal prosecutors essentially saying that donald trump committed a felony. >> but this is a first time that federal prosecutors are accusing the president of the united states from having

directed a crime. >> what they say is, michael: cohen's -- that person's donald trump and that means that donald trump also committed to felonies. >> laura: to felonies? is that with the statute says? >> i think joe has a pretty thin read for the president to hang his hat on. i think there was an intention and if that money was paid, that is a huge problem. and senator edwards was prosecuted. he was acquitted, but he was prosecuted by the obama justice department, as you recall, and you could argue personal. yes he was found not guilty but certainly the the presidents dm is not to go to a jury trial and be found not guilty. but he wouldn't want to head this off long before that and i don't think that argument really works.

>> the justice department in that case it really leaned forward on that too far. if the president can make the argument that this was a payment to avoid personal embarrassment, and frankly donald trump could say, i've been paying off women for years, long before i ever started running for president. this is -- it actually makes a lot of sense. >> laura: this is what "the new york times" leads with. and that involves two women, mcdougall and stormy daniels. one payment made to buy the rights and that question is somewhat related, and again i don't know michael: cohen, but

why is he in a position of any authority? >> he was trump's exit guy for over ten years. >> to byron's point, if there is a pattern here, and no one knows that, then that is nothing. and we also want to know what has transpired in the past. this is michael trying to pace himself. >> this isn't a southern district filing today and this sums up the kind of guy that michael cohen is. we are in washington and, cohen, and a businessman and committed four distinct crimes over a period of several years. and the crimes committed by cohen were more serious than his

admission allows and marked by a pattern of deception that was hidden from the friends and family members who wrote on his behalf. i am very wary of you prosecutors. but you have to rely on him to make the case against the president. and joe did genova, you rely on criminals to give up the goods on john gotti. >> first they are not going to make a case against the president of the united states no matter what their evidences because the justice department has ruled that you cannot indict a sitting president. april twice on that, once in a democratic administration under bill clinton and once in the nixon administration but it's very important to realize what the prosecutor said in those pleadings. they said that michael cohen violated the law and that

according to them it was instructed by number one, the candidate, to make the payments. they didn't say that the candidate told him to make illegal payments. they were very careful not to say that the candidate instructed him to violate the law. it's a very, very important part of the pleading. they have not alleged that the president of united states violated the law, the alleged of that michael cohen did. >> i think the president not being charged is different from what the democrats are representatives in the u.s. senate. >> it's going to go it seems to me with the president being indicted or, at least up to that point and it's going to go to congress taking on a very serious and very, very appropriate investigation and you might call that the opening

days of the impeachment. >> i think the totality of today's filings show that the house will give little choice on how this is going other than the start of proceedings. >> i think a lot of democrats will tell you that as of today they have enough to go forward with that. he said he had made these playoffs at the presidents direction but now they are going to say they have federal prosecutors saying, the president committed to -- that is going to be enough. and i think there is going to be a series number of democrats. they are still a month away from being sworn in, a serious number of democrats who say the case has already been made of. >> but michael has no credibility, we are now seeing that he made $4 million from corporations who wanted access to donald trump and said he is a serial liar, he was lying to the

investigators and he wanted to save himself. so if the democrats think they will move on impeachment on the president of the united states, they will see the repercussions at the ballot box in 2,020. >> michael cohen is who was chosen, this is a lot of trump's own making. >> laura: that doesn't mean he committed a crime. having bad judgment and whom you hire, we've all had bad judgment. >> they will be corroborated. it didn't get this far without them having corroboration records and tapes. one of the people we haven't heard about is the national inquirer. if you believe that mueller is not smart enough to put the clues in there, -- >> what about him? >> probably because he is

working with the investigators. they are kept in the redacted or under sealed, and i think we have to be -- >> laura: i have to say, i'm not -- i hear what you are saying but i'm not seeing it so far. we could sit here all night and speculate. >> one person that is tony podesta, and that's how the cooperation has been. they are finally looking out at democrat and it is 20 podesta's failure to file as a foreign agent and gregory craig's failure to file as a foreign agent. that's what they are looking at. >> our own john roberts was part of what was in those redacted portions. jonathan turley spoke out about

what the special counsel was doing to new data. >> they are dangling out what is called a 5k1.1 letter which is basically a cooperation letter and they come back repeatedly and say, you don't have that letter. essentially they are turning that into a canned hunt. the only way he's out of that cage as if he tells them what they want to hear. but that's actually concerning to me because here's a guy who obviously is cooperating fully, they say he is credible. so what else did they want him to say? >> i have to get on this because this is why people really dislike certain prosecutors. he has given the information. he's been interviewed seven times by the special counsel i think at least, and you hear what he said? they are trying to get what they

want him to say. the most hardened criminals in the united states are not in solitary confinement. they put that man in solitary confinement, is only out two hours per day and i find that to be appalling. everyone watching the show should realize, u.s. prosecutors do this every day to people. not the solitary confinement as much but they turn the screws on individuals. a lot of people who don't have as much money as these individuals to fight it but they do this every day because people are petrified and they don't want to spend the rest of their life rotting in jail. it's a tool and it's a tactic, sometimes for good i understand but in this case especially with the manafort deal, i find it repulsive what they've done with him. >> i think one of the great things for your viewers that this trump incident, whatever you want to call it, the two years of trump, as shown the nation, that we are in great need of reform.

the idea that they are going to squeeze michael, maybe they will tell them the truth. but the fear is that they want to. it will obviously give him another shot after his sentencing to three or four years and they will get what's called a rule 35 which is the way that a federal prosecutors say to a judge, he's cooperated with us, now you should give him a big reduction. and what an impeachment of a witness where now he is providing information and having to judge the credibility of that is probably not credible -- >> it's very interesting, where is the rushing collusion? >> the thing to remember about cohen and manafort, they are special cases because they committed personal crimes and their businesses. they are both guilty of evading taxes and large sums and that's what they will get the big jail time for. >> they get them for tax

evasion, wire fraud, a thousand one statements, et cetera. >> we have one guy who's gotten 30 days and another guy who got 14 days. >> we have andy mccabe who hasn lying to the fbi since he was the acting director. he's being treated worse than all topple l chacko el chapo who is on trial in new york. >> manafort was found to have obstructed justice while he was out on big bail. but the fact that he was detained is not really outrageous. if he was trying to tamper with witnesses while he was out on bail. >> solitary confinement? >> no that i don't agree with.

>> i want sanctions as a push for a solitary confinement. who get solitary confinement? >> it has been an appalling display of bad supervision by federal judges as well who are permitting this. let's remember, there is no rushing collusion that has been proven and what really matters is how this investigation got started. what was the role of brennan and klapper and comey and sally gates. the first thing he's going to do is appoint a special counsel if mr. huber hasn't completed his work to investigate the genesis of all of this where no crimes were committed by anybody in the trump campaign involving russian collusion and yet somehow, the intelligence community of the united states was used as a weapon of federal

law enforcement. >> if anybody cares about freedom, they have to care about that in spades. >> laura: behind closed doors the transcript is coming out tomorrow. so we will know what's being said. apparently his lawyer is pulling him back. but i want to get your thoughts on what he said and we have a number of sound bites and i want to make sure that we go through them in the right order. he also spoke about what he perceives to be the ongoing series of attacks from trump on the justice department. i think we have that, let's watch. it should be coming any moment. is everybody ready for christmas? joe, you get coal all the way. >> the president's attacks on justice department broadly and i think the fbi are something that no matter what political party you are in, you should find it deeply troubling and continue to

speak out about, not become numb to attack somebody some rule o. >> laura: the president is speaking out for the rule of law as well, he speaking out for the idea that when you file an american citizen you reveal that the research provided was actually ginned up and funded by the individual can paint campaign political opponent, hillary clinton. that's one of the many abuses that james comey and company were responsible for. >> federal judges have acquitted themselves very well, including the fisa judges. >> laura: they have been very unhappy. >> the fisa court i think has done a good job and i think the federal judges in general have done a great job. >> let's talk about -- someone

was coming after you, they wanted to get you, and the research that they were using wasn't funded by someone that was your mortal sworn enemy in business or law, and that wasn't told to the judge, you think you would be a little upset? i think all of us at the state would be a little upset because its tainted evidence for at least it has to be looked at with a grain of salt. >> you've never had a guest that believes more in the exclusionary law than i do. i'm a criminal defense attorney. if there is tainted evidence, it shouldn't be used. but i don't why that by that. >> they leaked classified information, they sold it to reporters, took those stories and use them as verification and 98% of them was denied.

and the first application has been denied by the justice department. >> that's about trump's pick and it will likely raise some eyebrows in the trump world today. >> i like and respect phil barr and i know he's an institutionalist who cares deeply about the integrity of the justice department so i'm sure he will use the standard career resources he has to judge what he should be involved in what he shouldn't be involved in. bill barr is a talented person and he was a good attorney general the first time and i liked him then. >> trump is like, wait a second, get chris christie on the line. >> he uses sanctimony as a weapon. in his particular case it's very unbecoming.

let's remember that james comey is a disgrace to fired fbi director because he violated the law and violated the chain of command inside the justice department. i really don't care what james comey thinks about anything. and i sincerely hope that when the new attorney general takes over, one of the first things they do is get a draft indictment for james comey for leaking classified information and leaking information to "the new york times" and i think his performance as both a director and former director is a disgrace. and they are embarrassed by him and everything he has done since he was fired and before he was fired. >> laura: one last thing the behavior of the justice department in this whole

investigation, they have stonewalled every step of the way. >> i wonder why. you all were fantastic, thank you for being with us on a very busy friday night. raymond arroyo is next, you will not believe it. give isotoner gloves

for christmas because they keep getting better. there's smartouch for selfies, then there's four way stretch for flexibility. they even have smartdri. see? stays dry. so get isotoner gloves for the whole family.

>> laura: it's friday so it's not just manafort and cohen, it's friday folly. kevin hart bowed out of the oscars. a classic disney song next at an ivy league university and some of the dash again the second installment of the grossest christmas toys of the season. joining us now, raymond arroyo, best-selling author of the will wilder series. all right, kevin hart was set to host the academy awards, what happened there? >> loretta, the academy and abc wanted just what they did in the case of roseanne barr, a larger-than-life edgy act that

would draw a big audience. but when controversy followed they ran for the exits. going back to 2010, this is a bit of kevin hart's act. you knew what they knew what they were getting into. >> one of my biggest fears is my son growing up and being. if i could prevent him from being, i will. every kid has a moment, but when it happens, you have to nip it in the body, stop it right there. >> now, he also wrote similar tweets and over the years abc on the academy had to know this. now they fired a director remember a few years back for making an anti-gay slur on twitter and you will remember why they probably hired kevin hart, is a beloved african-american performer in this age of oscar's white, and you remember he's sided with the nfl kneelers and told the president "trump, suck it." the academy loved him until the

hollywood and the community started pushing back on social media calling him homophobic and anti, and they reached out to him. watch. >> i just got a call from the academy and the call basically said, kevin, i apologize for your tweet, or we will have to move on and find somebody else. so i passed. the reason why i passed is because i have addressed it several times. >> he said he wouldn't apologize, but eventually he did apologize. but abc which is the network involved in the academy awards, they did not learn they of roseanne barr lesson which is when the pc dogma makes moves on you, stand firm. you can get people to apologize for outrageous things but you can't collapse and through your talent overboard or comedy, the lane for comedy will narrow.

give people an option. >> laura: what did we play last night from jerry seinfeld when he was on? >> we have another one. watch this. comedy is by nature dangerous. >> and in that clip of kevin hart, it sounds like he is a self character. it's comedy. you don't believe what he is saying, i understand why people would say, that's not -- and i get it but the idea that -- of course it's not the way he feels. >> watch this, seinfeld. >> i do this joke about, people feel they need to justify their cell phone and i need to have it with me. while they don't seem very important the way you scroll through them like a french king. and they thought, what do you mean? what are you doing, what do you mean? and i thought, are you kidding

me? >> this is the problem, everybody is so sensitive. we need to have our foibles so we can laugh together. >> and don rickles, would he even be able to perform? humor is dead. let's talk now about the pc police again. they are everywhere striking fear into everyone's heart. remember a little mermaid? >> the tiger tones who is the a cappella group at princeton, they sing this and the routine is to bring a girl up from the audience. they serenade her and they invite another audience member to kiss the girl.

, they criticized them saying this is a heteronormative attack on women's rights to oppose the romantic and liberty taken by men. >> laura: is she supposed to write a consent form on stage? >> that was the heart of her complaint, no consent. so this is the romantic and liberty taken by a crab. remember a crab in the movie is trying to convince a guy too because the girl to get her voice back. >> laura: there are lots of band songs. and, and you remember, laura, the last time i introduced you to some of the most popular toys of the season, they are really nasty and gross.

i have to bring this to you, these are real. and this will not be on the raymond arroyo kids' christmas list. the first one is called, doggy do. players feed pellets of dog foo food, and but when the plops you get a fark token and the fark token wins the game. this promotes responsibility and i think it glorifies. i don't need a game like this. i have the home addition of this, it's called mattie the machine. i don't need the game. do we have time for the other game? it's called it's not it. now you where glasses with the sticky strands of snot and you

pick up a booger. >> laura: i would say that one of my and blackjack is where she works at the sands hotel. >> didn't you play rock 'em sock 'em robots? >> it's the same idea as to the poop game. >> you have to open up your mind with possibilities. >> whoever came up with these games had to be doing those shrooms that we are talking about in the next segment. at first they told us that it

was going to be legal for medicinal purposes and now they wanted it delivered to the front door. the debate about the weed-vacation of america, next.

>> how's it going? >> hey. how is it going with you?

>> hey man, he got a joint? >> not on me. >> it would be cooler if you did. >> laura: at first we were just told that it was just going to help people coping with serious illnesses, then we were told it was just to relieve pain. then, we were told it was for legal adults and no worse than alcohol. but now colorado wants her to get to a whole new level. frustrated by the more moderate john hickenlooper's push for legalization, they want to pass a bill to be allowing pot delivery right to your front door. here to debate it is representative jonathan singer, and and why make it easier for

folks to get at their hands on pot. >> in 2012 marijuana said it would be legal, constitutional, and that we have people going up on craigslist delivering marijuana to people's doors and not caring about what was on the other side of the door. is it a kid, an adult? we don't know. now it's time to take it out of the shadows and regulate it just like alcohol. make sure we license our drivers, get them tracked by gps and make sure we are not selling to kids. >> laura: legal legalization has not limited the trade in colorado. and we have that minor inconvenience that it's still a federal crime. so you want to make it legal to facilitate an ongoing federal crime with the delivery of pot to the doorstep. >> it's even more important to

stamp out a black market. >> laura: that was stamped out with marijuana in general. >> that's because we are not fully regulating it like we should be. >> i lived in colorado my whole life and we've seen the black market actually thrive in the "legalized" state of colorado. colorado is now the number one exporter of black market marijuana and we have international cartels that are buying up suburban houses, turning them into grow houses and shipping marijuana across the country. there is a major impact in the black market when you lay guys and it doesn't go away like we were told. black-market is an issue but the real issue is today, the owner of marlborough and philip morris, a major mega million dollar tobacco company just bought a $1.8 billion taken a marijuana company. >> it's about money, they are making millions. when john boehner who used to be against legalizing weed, he is

like i had a change of heart, well how much money is on the board that you say you are a consultant on? let's say this is all for regulating and we want to make everything safe, this is about big money. if there weren't billions in this, we wouldn't be talking about it. and then maybe ask a question, is it good for especially young people who are using this in greater numbers today because of the overall legalization push, turning it earlier, and having more developmental problems as a result. not to look at older people but the young developing brain, et cetera disaster to start smoking pot or ingesting pot at an early age. >> that's where all three of us will agree. this is not for kids, and unless you are talking to a doctor, this is not something that could should be having. the bill we ran last year was

supported by a libertarian republican. and if everything happened in a vacuum then great. and deaths related to marijuana have doubled in colorado. >> laura: how would that work on the delivery? play it out for me. play it out on like an uber style website, or your app, just for pot. or would it be, uber drivers could also themselves deliver it? i'm not following how that would work. >> first of all impaired driving is incredibly serious. i have been to the funeral of a friend of mine who lost a stepdaughter to a driver who wasn't paired with both alcohol and marijuana. our laws are not strong enough. the way this works, you dial

something up and you have a licensed gps to attract person shows up. and that is up 14%. and we are talking about apps now and technology, new innovations with this big tobacco industry. >> we see this thing go forward in the first six months. it's spreading christmas cheer in a very unique way. that's coming up next. (male speaker) remember when christmas was magical?

when the mailman delivered to the north pole? and we all had a front-row, shoulder-top seat at the parade? let's get back there. santa's wonderland at bass pro shops and now cabela's has what we've all been missing. with all kinds of crafts and activities your kids will always remember. even a picture with santa and it's all free. that's right-- free.

time passes. hold onto christmas.

>> laura: inspired by that motto, a boston firefighter decided to spread some christmas cheer in beantown with a twist. watch. ♪

one person didn't play along with a pillow fight, but i want to go there. that's all i have for tonight, shannon bream and the fox news at 19 take it all from here. >> this is a fox news alert. the president said he has been vindicated on a major night for the mueller investigation. shedding light on the dual filings of the president's former attorney michael cohen and his ex campaign manager, paul manafort, providing clues about where the russia investigation headset, next. and the white house tonight is watching and responding as the president writes to say he is in the clear. is there anything pointing to clear-cut evidence, the original on the team. hello and welcome. we begin