joe biden, his son hunter, and from the state department and everyone else, john solomon, investigative report that we will break right here on the show. but let not your heart be troubled. laura ingraham is next. >> laura: can you save a tidbit of that and toss me a crumb in the 10:00 hour because i love solomon. just a little bit of a piece of news please. >> sean: i will come on as a guest on your show any night you asked. >> laura: okay. yes. i'm coming on with you next week and you're coming out tomorrow. awesome show. fantastic show. i am laura ingraham and this is "the ingraham angle" from washington. tonight just like last night we are going to bring you some of the most comprehensive breakdowns of everything that transpired today and it's a lot. ken starr former deputy sol wisenberg explain why there is no smoking gun on this

ukraine transcript. congress and jim jordan, chris stewart who just read the whistle-blower complaint, breakdown the fight on capitol hill. former independent counsel robert ray is also here and why allegations against the biden family are far more serious than what trump is facing. and raymond arroyo has a special impeachment edition of ""seen and unseen"." that's coming up as well. but first, seven lessons from the past 48 hours. that's the focus of tonight's angle. i read through the rough transcript of the call between trump and the new ukrainian president. a few things struck me. number one, there's not a single person in washington with any experience in government, not one, who really believes the president was trying to use the ukrainian government to ring the 2020 election. i don't see how anyone in his or her right mind could legitimately say there is an impeachable offense in this

transcript. in the conversation, trump congratulated volodymyr zelensky on his parliamentary win and said the u.s. would continue to support ukraine but he was frustrated that the e.u. isn't doing more. zelensky agreed saying the european union should be our biggest partner. technically the united states is a much bigger partner. we are ready to continue to cooperate for the next step specifically. almost ready to buy more javelins from the united states for defense purposes. then the president responds "i would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and ukraine knows a lot about it. i would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with ukraine. they say crowd strike, the server, they say ukraine has it. i would like to have the attorney general call you or your people and i would like you to get to the bottom of it. whatever you can do it's very important that you do it if that's possible." zelensky interjected that insistent had met with giuliani

and that the investigation was very important for him as well. adding "i guarantee that all the investigations will be done openly and candidly. that i can assure you." okay, handling investigations openly and can -- candidly. sounds like an evil plot. how nefarious of them. there is no quid pro quo and the president never hinted ukrainian aid would be withheld if a further investigation wasn't done. at this point i think it's pretty obvious that the democrats overplayed their hand big time. they based their impeachment move on a whistle-blower who didn't even hear the conversation and who grossly exaggerated what happened in it. which brings me to point number two. the president not only did nothing wrong, he went above and beyond his duty to his office, hoping to discover what happened in the lead up to the 2016

election so it never happens to another president again. as we know, the biden story is about far more than just hunter biden making big money in ukraine while daddy was setting ukraine policy. >> i fully support transparency on the so-called whistle-blower information but also insist on transparency from joe biden and his son, hunter, and the millions of dollars that have been quickly and easily taken out of ukraine and china. >> laura: if foreign governments were approached to assist in digging up dirt on trump in the lead up to 2016, that's a big problem. and trump is right. we need to get to the bottom of any election tampering. i thought democrats wanted to stop election meddling by foreign governments. which takes us to point number three. democrats don't really care about preventing government corruption. any democrat claiming to be interested in corruption should

be outraged by the fact that biden himself braved on camera about dangling a foreign aid carrot to get a prosecutor fired. when that prosecutor was involved in investigating the company paying his son boatloads of cash. not a single democrat will even concede that biden's actions that the very least were an obvious conflict of interest? it's extremely telling. >> leaving in six hours and if the prosecutor is not fired, you're not getting the money. son of a [bleep]. he got fired. >> laura: number four. if president trump wanted to pressure ukraine to hurt biden with the intent on improving his own reelection chances, there were a hundred better ways to do it. by the way, ways that wouldn't involve speaking to the ukrainian president on the phone when he knows that the call is monitored and memorialized by intelligent staffers.

while the democrats insist trump was pressuring ukraine to invest biden -- investigate biden, what does the ukrainian president himself say? >> i think good phone call. it was normal. we spoke about many things. i think and you read cover that nobody pushed me. >> laura: nobody pushed him. so the principal himself adamant no pressure from trump. the call was normal. nothing out of the ordinary. so are the impeachment dams saying that zelensky here on caa is lying? so it's a trump ukrainian conspiracy in plain sight? does this all this kind of sound familiar to any of you? phony collusion claims in 2017, phony pressure claims now. number five. there are no moderates left in the democratic party.

this point is beyond debate. during the midterms, swing district democrats claimed they were anxious to work with the president. now they are the tips of the impeachment sphere. >> the quid pro quo element doesn't need to be there for this to be a crime. >> this was a line that was crossed for the national security dems and something that we thought the caucus needed to move on. >> it may be a controversial issue and when you look at the facts and you look at the specific instance, i think it's a total game changer. >> laura: it's a game changer for the democratic party. they are all ilhan omar now. when they are up for reelection and they insist, they insist they are moderates who just want government to work again. don't believe them. they must be voted out of office for violating their pledge to be more bipartisan. number six, democrat leadership has totally given up on governing. time and again, trump has beaten them at their own game. we've seen it.

i'm beginning to think it's made them -- they are losing it. day after day, they are totally delusional. you know lunatic hobos who blurt out crazy things and zigzag in the middle of a crowded intersection. adam schiff kind of sounded like that today. >> those notes reflect is a classic mafia like shakedown of a foreign leader. this is how a mafia boss talks, like any mafia boss, the president didn't need to say that the nice country you have and be -- it would be a shame if something happened to it. >> laura: the man doesn't even know the godfather. he doesn't know the movie. he doesn't notice shakedown is. i remember on the democrats told us they were going to work on health care and infrastructure. they were going to take on the drug companies. did not come into any of that. takes us to my seventh and final point. biblical. democrats are possessed with anti-trump rage. maybe there needs to be an

exorcism. they are infuriated that mueller let them down, that trump has beaten them pretty much at every turn. they are obsessed with punishing him and anyone who works for him, anyone is close to him. think about it. does leadership give impassioned press conferences on their plans for reining in government waste and fraud and abuse? improving the economy? no, they save all their emotion and bogus investigations and angry denunciations of anyone associated with this president. the polls are clear. this is not what americans want. these representatives were not sent to washington to frustrate the people's will. they were sent to washington to do the people's will. at this point, trump is doing that all of his own. soon it's going to turn to the people. they will have their say and they're going washington know what it thinks about the job they've done. and properly framed, the election will be a choice

between g democrats, revenge and resist style politics, or the president's results. unfortunately for pelosi and schiff, you can't impeach her own constituents, and that's the angle. he would respond as ken starr, former whitewater independent counsel. sol wisenberg. as i mentioned, the favor trump asked for was help investigating the 2016 election but hosts at cnn and msnbc chose today and the democrats did as well, chose today to lie about what that paper pertained. watch. >> trump then asked for a favor. i would like you to do us a favor, he says. the ukrainian president get his government to investigate joe biden. >> he said will you do me a favor and investigate vice president biden's son? will you do me a favor and get involved in the 2020 election?

vice president biden is my chief political opponents. >> laura: lying on national television. moments ago aoc repeated the lie on cnn. >> what we are talking about here is the president essentially participating in what looks like a series of events that looks like extortio extortion. withholding aid to an ally and then unquote asking for a favor to essentially benefit yourself politically. >> laura: sol wisenberg, what is this really all about? >> well, i think the president, while the president showed extremely poor judgment in the phone call, i think you're right that it's a complete exaggeration of the conversation. as i said last night, i don't get comes close to being an impeachable offense. understanding that the definition of an impeachable offense is somewhat amorphous.

it's basically whacked a majority in congress says is an impeachable offense but historically, thematically, i don't think where they are and i think they harm themselves by grossly exaggerating what was said in the conversation. >> laura: can, my specific question was about this favor. when they reference the favor, they melted into two investigate hunter biden, joe biden because he is going to be his opponent in 2020. that was never said. i actually read the transcript like five times today. that's not what is sad. if either of you have spoken to the president at length, it's usually a pretty feel freewheeling conversation in a good way. he's thrown in a lot of things there. there are literally telling a falsehood night after night after night in many ways but tonight specifically about that fact. ten. >> yes, i think the use of the term favor, it's unfortunate. i agree with sol.

one can question the judgment and the wisdom of the call but i think it's a wildly extravagant to say that this somehow constituted a crime, a, of favors, of some sort of effort to affect the election of the united states, especially when, and we are all trained to do this, we should do this in literature class. read the entire transcript. the context is one of two world leaders having a conversation including about what europe is not doing. you have to read a lot about what france is not doing. angela merkel is not doing. context is critically important. >> laura: what i have to say to both of you, we've had conversations. presidents having conversations with foreign leaders about corruption all the time. america is forever trying to get our allies or get people who are kind of our allies to do better. as for you should be investigating this, it's not out

of the ordinary. when the ukrainian president says its normal staff. i think most people have conversations like that at a high-level, 50,000 feet, i don't find it out of the ordinary at all. i really didn't. i didn't surprise me at all. >> let me add that president zelensky was quite eloquent in this translation, talking about he wants honest government. you mentioned the open and candid dimension of it. >> laura: is that not what we want? yeah. i mean, i don't think we should want anything else. >> you know, laura. >> laura: go ahead, sol. two sorry to interrupt. i don't know if it's ordinary or not. i'm not usually privy to these conversations, that's part of the problem. but the president says we have aided you a lot and it hasn't been reciprocal. zelensky says some things and then the president says you could do me a favor. you're right he doesn't talk at all about biden right away but

he gets around to biden and mentions biden's son and he mentions it a few times. that's why i say it's unfortunate. it's bad judgment. very bad judgment. but it doesn't come close in my view to being a crime or to being impeachable. that's the problem. >> laura: words like extortion used. shakedown. these terms are casually thrown around by even lawyers. speaking of lawyers, the media have been desperately trying to tag and drag bill barr, the attorney general, someone we all three of us know quite well. take a look. >> is barr going to now recuse himself? >> i don't see how he can't in light of the fact that he's named. >> i think attorney general barr should absolutely refuse. >> how can bill barr not recuse himself? >> level 1 to 10, ten being the

most likely, that the attorney general would recuse himself in this matter. ken, what do you think? >> two to three. i don't get this serious issue. we now know, we've been informed that the president never reached out to the attorney general directly or indirectly, that the attorney general has had no communications with the ukrainian government about all of this. we saw it in the russia investigation, the mueller report. the president asked for something to be done but it doesn't end up getting done. there's no reason for bill barr to recuse himself. >> laura: sol, hold on one second. folks at cnn today are saying we need a special counsel. they are at a special counsel .0. if it weren't so serious, it would be like a "saturday night live" sketch if they had any balanced sense of humor.

this is what is being proposed by supposedly serious people. >> i never promised never to use -- >> bill barr is implicated in this call, verbally being enlisted to assist in this effort. he's now in charge of evaluating whether this criminal referral has any merit under u.s. law. it's a conflict of interest. so technically there should be special counsel 2.0. >> laura: we stepped on you a little bit, sol. your thoughts. >> it's okay. i promise never to use this word but all the old democratic troops are coming out here. i think he should not recuse himself. i think it's even less than what ken talked about with the mueller report because in the mueller report got a couple instances where the president asked somebody to do something they didn't do it, thus protecting him. here the president never talked about to barr and never asked barr about anything. however i think it's very important, and this, of all the

things in the conversation that upset me the most, is by mentioning the attorney general who has been very careful to set up the durham investigation. >> laura: looking into this. >> looking into fisa abuse, looking into fisa abuse and all the things that happened against president trump in the election. he has put this impeccable, person of impeccable reputation, career prosecutor in charge of it. the attorney general has said it all up so that we can have confidence in it and then for the president to say something in this investigation, i'm going to have my attorney general -- it's not -- >> laura: i think he probably knew -- again, we are all lawyers. i think he probably may be understood that this is being investigated already or was in the process of being investigated and he probably knew at some point they were going to likely talk to him. i don't know. but it was like durham versus barr. i had a freewheeling

conversation. i think the fact that we are releasing transcripts of our conversations with foreign leaders, i bet there are a lot of foreign leaders out there who are very unhappy right now i'm worried about what it's going to do to the presidency. great to have you on. thank you so much. jim jordan is one of the first congressman to read the transcript of this call with the ukrainian president. congressman chris stewart just viewed the actual whistle-blower complaint and they are both your and moments. >> vo: my car is my after-work decompression zone.

♪ music >> vo: so when my windshield broke... i found the experts at safelite autoglass. they have exclusive technology and service i can trust. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ doprevagen is the number oneild mempharmacist-recommendeding? memory support brand. you can find it in the vitamin aisle in stores everywhere. prevagen. healthier brain. better life.

>> laura: now that the democrats are fully embracing impeachment, we want to take you through the next steps. joining me now, chi fox news national correspondent ed henry. >> good to see you. what is significant would be the numbers. the fact that a majority of the 217 house democrats are saying that they are in favor of some sort of impeachment inquiry. what comes next? it would be the house judiciary committee drafting articles of impeachment. what's interesting tonight is that there is a split among democrats. you have some democrats saying they want kind of a kitchen sink approach. they want to keep their base completely happy by having articles of impeachment about russia and the mueller probe, about hush payments to porn stars, and ukraine as well. there is another camp and it appears in sticker nancy pelosi

might be leaning more in this direction that wants to keep it narrowly focused on ukraine because they believe they can move quicker on it and it would also keep some of the more moderate democrats who won swing districts, trump districts, in 2018, on board. look at the problem. two of those more moderate democrats, they didn't seem to know what they were for. watch. >> do you have the votes to begin the official inquiry if you were to take a vote right now? >> right now it's not about starting inquiry. it's about getting to the bottom of this. >> i thought that's what nancy pelosi said yesterday, you are opening official inquiry, those were her words. i think a lot of people want to know why not vote on it if there is such a strong feeling about it. >> i'm happy to take a personal vote on the floor on articles of impeachment but first we need to understand what if anything happened. >> so you see that they are saying we don't necessarily want an impeachment inquiry.

we want investigations, even though there's been investigations of the president for well over two years. interesting, ted lieu, leading democrat, he said today "we have to act quickly but not in haste." that kind of seems to sum up where democrats are right now. they can't quite decide. >> laura: synonyms all right. stay right there. and fox has confirmed about a dozen republican lawmakers were there earlier today to read the transcript of trump's ukraine call before it was released and jim jordan joins me now. chris stewart. he just viewed the actual whistle-blower document and congressman, you have some breaking news for us tonight. >> we know that it's been declassified and it's been released so it should be available for everyone to look at and i encourage everyone to go look at it. before i went in this morning, i was a little bit anxious. i thought am i going to be surprised? is there going to be something of this where i go, oh, no.

i can tell you after reading it i'm much more confident tonight and i was this morning that it's going to be, it's going to go nowhere. there's no surprises. the entirety of it is focused on the transcript of one phone call, transcript release this morning. there are some reports from "the wall street journal" and from politico and they are ancillary. they have nothing to do with it. it's this one phone call we've been talking about all day. >> laura: at cnn, one of the other congressman ran out to cameras after seeing it, had a different take, surprisingly. let's watch. >> deeply disturbing. reinforces the concerns. the white house is selectively trying to control the spin on stuff as they did with the special counsel's report. all i can tell you is they are doing the very same thing here. >> laura: what i'm confused

and i think a lot of people are, did the whistle-blower see the transcript or was told by a friend? how did this whistle-blower -- i'm curious. >> it's an important question because you would think he did not see it. >> laura: or she. we have wagers about whether it's a woman or man. >> i want to get on that. he or she did not see it, did not read it, did not hear it. all secondhand knowledge. the man who came on and claimed how dramatic it is, it's nonsense. if you think it's dramatic, read the transcript and tell me if you think it's dramatic. i think, and most american people go, what is this about? i don't care if there's 217 democrats voting for impeachment. that doesn't matter. it's the american people that matter. look at what richard nixon did. look at what bill clinton did. they know intuitively this is

wrong but you have to explain brim to talk to a foreign leader and asked to investigate corruption, most americans go "i don't get it." where's the crime? >> laura: i thought the democrats cared about corruption. for three years you've been talking, they care about corruption. tonight i said they don't care about it at all. they care about power. >> what chris just said is the central focus of the claims is the transcript that we all read today and nancy pelosi is going to base an impeachment on that document? everyone should read it. i hope your viewers do because there was no quid pro quo and no talk about aid for any favor. the whistle-blower himself was not, as chris said, had no firsthand knowledge and wasn't part of the call and i bet he hasn't seen the transcript until today. but he did have a political bias against the president, that was clear. he told the inspector general he was out to get the president. >> laura: is there any of that in this complaint? do you have any understanding about the political bias? >> people are going to be able

to read it. if you read it, it is snarky and a claims something expansive that at the end of the day -- >> laura: it sounds like the whistle-blower is doing what some of the democrats are doing in discussing what this is all about. it's a spin, always the worst possible light for the president. >> for sure. you can read it. it's pretty clear. >> laura: is that handwritten notes? interview notes? >> it's funny, we're kind of laughing. it looks like a fusion gps product. it's a very well organized, well written document that makes one supposition. it's all based on this one thing. >> laura: so it is the phone call. it's not multiple other events? earlier this week there were multiple events involving this. this is wild. >> and arguable political bias. who talks like that? you don't know that sounds like?

when they went to the fisa court and talked about the dossier, candidate a, candidate b. this is what nancy pelosi wants to base an impeachment inquiry on? president zelensky said he wasn't pushed. he said in a conversation i want to drain the swamp in ukraine just like you're draining it here. >> laura: in russia they say [speaking russian] it was like that. ed, you just heard from congressman stewart that we have this complaint, it's released, unredacted, declassified. you have the transcript which now they're complaining about, saying it's not really transcript. it's a conspiracy of the transcribers now. what are you hearing tonight? are they worried they might of been over their skis a little bit, the democrats. >> some of them might be. congressman stewart said the

whistle-blower complaint was largely about the phone call that we have now seen this transcript on. laura, you said there were news reports claiming that the whistle-blower complaint was a whole lot more than the phone call. a series of incidents that may be led this whistle-blower to complain, to speak out and say that there was a whole series of problems with the president. congressman stewart now saying it's largely about the call. i spoke to a senior administration officials might've told me that the other stuff the whistle-blower talks about in the complaint is largely stuff you could've gotten from news clippings. stuff that's been in the public domain. remember, and if the congressman can confirm it, originally a lid of people in the media presented this a couple days ago as this whistle-blower inside the government saw things, up close but really alarmed him or her. but instead i'm hearing from a senior administration official this quote-unquote whistle-blower heard about the call secondhand but heard about other things already in the

public domain, not stop that that whistle-blower has firsthand knowledge of. >> laura: you can get lots of lawyers in washington but isn't it regret activists lawyer for the whistle-blower? >> it's not largely based on the transcript. it's entirely based. there are some reports, politico and the new york types. >> laura: these are legitimate supposedly media organizations. >> is zero, nothing was firsthand knowledge of any of it. >> laura: none of this is an impeachable offense. it's ludicrous. it's a looney tunes central. i'm telling you, this is like, i'm thinking of looney tunes cartoons. panel, fantastic conversation as always. thank you for the breaking news, congressman jordan, ed. when trump is pushing for transparency in this whole ukraine ordeal you think some people would like get that corruption. but there's just one big mystery still left. where is hunter biden? "the ingraham angle"

investigates next.

joe biden's son hunter is smack dab in this ukraine controversy. i'm asking where the world is hunter biden? why aren't journalist desperately trying to find him, interview him, staking out his location, where he lives? have they hung up their pens and pads? are they out of the news business altogether? not one media member finds it odd that hunter biden joined a

ukrainian energy company, burisma, despite having zero oil and gas expertise? >> there is no evidence of anything having to do with joe biden or his son. the president is speaking as if there is. the president is hoping that you will get distracted by that. >> laura: none of them wonder why he got paid an astronomical $600,000 a year or fee to consult? >> their strategy is now to try to put the onus on joe biden to infect distract and attack. >> laura: truly red flags would go up when joe biden. about getting the prosecutor investigating his son's company fired, right? >> joe biden's issue has been looked at for a long time. there's been findings that there is no improper involvement. this is a distraction. >> laura: [laughs] nothing to see here. the real distraction is the media's refusal to cover this story. joining me now, robert ray,

former whitewater independent counsel, byron york correspondent for the "washington examiner," fox news contributor. robert from an investigator standpoint, you're experiencing the legal world, one the most respected lawyers out there, isn't the biden angle more troubling than what trump is accused of? maybe having some, you know, exuberance or ken starr and sol were saying bad judgment to bring it up in a phone call. being accused of that versus what biden did? >> if anybody exercised mafia-like tactics to strong arm the ukrainians, it was joe biden. now what the purpose of all of that was i suppose is subject still to some debate. i do know that rudy giuliani feels very strongly that there is not only smoke out there in the ukraine but fire as well as

to what exactly was going on with our "where's waldo" candidate, hunter biden. although i do think if i can differ with you for just a moment, as an investigator or otherwise, my sense is if joe biden remains the leading contender for the democratic nomination and i have my doubts about whether or not that will continue, because this is going to implode on everybody. i don't think this issue is going to drop and hunter biden and the vice president's roll in all of this is going to be looked at whether in an official capacity or investigative capacity by journalists. it's an irresistible subject matter and it will be delved into. >> laura: apparently durham, of course the special prosecutor looking into it, is now we found out today looking into the ukraine aspect of this pre2016 -- this funny business going on with perhaps the dossier and

other dirt digging on president trump. >> that seemed to be what the president was hinting at. but i'm not entirely sure i understand how that related. the only way i think that would have been obvious to the president would have been as a result of his discussions with rudy giuliani. >> laura: the crowdstrike. >> may be knows more than we do and ultimately somebody's going to find out about it. >> laura: let's go to byron. byron, it's been a wild 48 hour hours. seven lessons from 48 hours, it could have been 20. it's been whipped up into an absolute frenzy. hunter biden, find it odd that he's not even giving an interview to a friendly news organization. where is he? where does he live? apparently last cited in california, has lived in other locations. maybe lived overseas for a while but he's living in california. >> we don't have what are called

stake outs outside someone's house? ken starr would know a lot about that. it happened every day. actually today james lankford the republican senator on the intelligence committee in the senate said that investigation of all this would have to start with the biden's because we are all the time that they are errors absolute no evidence that joe biden did any of the stuff and yet we don't get the sense that people are digging very hard for it. so it's going to have to change if democrats go ahead with what they are saying they are going to do which is to impeach the president on this ukraine issue. >> laura: again, the fact that hunter biden has not appeared to give an interview on morning joe or, like a friendly forum where they maybe have coffee in the morning and hang out with her friends. it's bizarre, strange. >> he did do a story with the new yorker a few weeks ago and everybody thought it was kind of a preemptive story to try to get -- >> laura: it wasn't great. >> it wasn't good but it

probably wasn't -- >> laura: not complete. i want to get back to this. menendez, durbin, leahy wrote to ukraine demanding that they cooperate with investigations into the trump campaign. they heavily implied their support, their aid to ukraine was at stake in all of this so ironically robert ray, this is the exact behavior democrats say is an impeachable offense even without the explicit quid pro quo that you could say in a way exists with the democrat senators. what is this we are talking about? >> what this is about of course is about politics and much less about whether or not really there is an impeachable offense. i just listened recently on another network to aoc essentially claim that a basis for impeachment is deviation from our norms of democracy. we don't impeach presidents

based upon deviations from norm norms. and then the outer edges of their commentators claiming that this phone call represents the demise of our democracy. i'm sorry. i beg to differ. there is no quid pro quo. there is no treason. there is no bribery because the federal bribery statute doesn't apply to foreign government officials. there is no quid pro quo and there is no legal campaign contribution because it's a department of justice, a properly found asking somebody to open investigation does not constitute a thing of value. since there is no crime. >> laura: end of story, done. byron, real quick. we are out of time. where will it go next? will they hit the magic number western marks because they are going to hit the magic number but the question is a 1998, the house voted to open a formal impeachment inquiry. 31 democrats sided with

republicans voting that way about bill clinton. nancy pelosi does not want to do that now. the rules do not require her to do that but some democrats will have to cast a vote on this issue. >> laura: and they will have to go home to their constituent constituents. swing areas especially, key states do not want to. byron, robert, phenomenal analysis. the impeachment gamut is ingested political play. it could cost them. how much are they risking? doug schoen has all the details next. power to lower power to lower my blood sugar and a1c. because i can still make my own insulin. and trulicity activates my body to release it like it's supposed to. trulicity is for people with type 2 diabetes. it's not insulin. i take it once a week. it starts acting in my body from the first dose. trulicity isn't for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. don't take trulicity if you're allergic to it, you or your family have medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2.

stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have an allergic reaction, a lump or swelling in your neck, or severe stomach pain. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases low blood sugar risk. side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, belly pain and decreased appetite, which lead to dehydration and may worsen kidney problems. i have it within me to lower my a1c. ask your doctor about trulicity.

>> laura: so what will the followed be if the democrats fail in this impeachment gambit of theirs? joining me now, doug schoen, former advisor to president clinton. harmeet dhillon, fox news contributor. doug, explain for our audience exactly what the democrats stand is? >> they stand to lose the presidency in the house. they could blow it all and i worked for bill clinton in '98 and i saw the republicans overreaching on impeachment. it hurt them in the '98 congressional elections when we ran on progress, not politics. you saw the video that's been shown of the democrats widely decrying the republicans overreaching and having read the transcripts, heard about what the whistle-blower said, there's

no slam-dunk here. if they go forward with impeachment inquiry, which i don't think it's clear yet, but if they go forward and then vote, it could be curtains for the democrats and for joe biden, this is calamitous news becauses precludes him getting any positive message out. >> laura: i'm going to get to what's going to happen in certain swing districts but harmeet, nancy pelosi, 1998 she was basically saying that the american people don't want this, don't need it. it's fun to see nancy 20 years ago. we all looked younger. people are paralyzed with hatred, okay, because of their impeachment quest. pot meet kettle. harmeet, any irony here? >> irony i think is beyond these folks. they are unprincipled and desperate and it's reflected in their actions. i've been saying for the last three years nancy pelosi has been one of the voices of reasons the democratic party. she's very shrewd. i don't think she wanted to do

this but i think she felt like she was being cornered by the left-wing of her party and she gave in. ethic it's going to go down in history as one of the dark days of her political judgment and going along with this because as doug just said, the american people don't want it. the facts don't support it. the whistle-blower complaint sounds to me like it was written by fusion gps. and it's really going to end up drawing very negative attention to the front runner in the democratic race. undermine the credibility. >> laura: okay, take biden out of it. every poll including the newest ones released today. quinnipiac, we will put the numbers are. it's not where people want to go. this is it. it's this transcript. we heard the whistle-blower complaint is based on that transcript. that's it. okay? look at these numbers. look at these numbers for registered voters only 37% want impeachment. doug, let's skip to orange county.

let's go to orange county a little bit down the coast from harmeet. she's up in san fran with the fun people. the swing districts, the republican districts that slip democrat. they all promise to be bipartisan. we are going to work with the president where we can agree. they have done none of that and now they're all voting for impeachment? how is that going to work for california? are you kidding me? >> those districts were very, very close. two and three in orange county, the democrats won by 1% or less and candidly, given those independent numbers which were 34 yes, 58 no, it's a red flag and i want the democrats to win, laura. you know that. i worked for some of those through an independent expenditure. this would be a really bad move for those democrats. >> laura: they have already given the nod. >> they haven't voted yet.

>> laura: i think, harmeet, you have to force a vote but my guess, if i have to guess and it's just a guess, pelosi is going to slept back -- step back from this. she is smarter than this. it can't be that easy. >> laura, these lemmings are rushing over the cliff while nancy is trying to slow play it. i don't think she can stop this train. i think she wants to. i think they've gone too far. >> laura: got to go, got to go. aoc says it's extortion. that's it, end of story. coming up, raymond arroyo is here with a special ""seen and unseen"" impeachment edition. now's the perfect time to stock up on all your opening day essentials at big savings! bass pro shops and cabela's. your adventure starts here.

>> laura: fun, it's time for are seen and unseen, the impeachment addition. outrageous claims, a familiar script and raymond arroyo and i go head-to-head. if you're part of a bake-off, this is an impeach-off. john is now, raymond arroyo. you look at the media coverage of this entire bogus claim of wrongdoing and a phone call that rises to impeachment, what did you find? >> by way of comparison, our

producer and i went back and we look at the way the media covered the last presidential impeachment. watch the restraint, caution, even empathy the media had when bill clinton was the subject of congressional inquiry back in 1998. >> in washington this evening, supporters of the president are reeling. >> the president's focus will be on foreign affairs but much of the focus in washington is on the airing of this videotape grand jury testimony. >> shortly after the jurors were sworn the president unveiled a new education proposal. >> after a lifetime of striving for a celebrated rank among american presidents, this diligent student of history was handed his place. >> now compare that to what we've seen -- >> laura: that is hilarious! >> in the last 24 hours, watch this. >> he will abuse any power of the presidency to make sure he gets reelected. >> it just came up a few minutes ago -- >> we hate to do this really, but the president isn't telling the truth. >> this is worse than i think

people expected. >> republicans on the hill loathe the, loathe, i can't say enough, they loathe donald trump. >> laura: they loathe the media and that flashback is worth the price of admission. >> this is judge, jury and executioner. the media showed such restraint, caring, even empathy when they reported bill clinton. this is why i believe when you look at the polls, the columbia journalism review did a poll, they found all the institutions in america, the price was the lowest in confidence among people. >> laura: shocker. >> and its dropping. >> news lists have compiled 89 things democrats a trumpet be impeached for. they include forcing some countries are holes and because the junior to virginia governor war blackface. maxine waters has had from should be impeached for not being respectful and for creating division and chaos. herein lies the problem, the media has done a horrible job of explaining impeachable offenses,

crimes and misdemeanors, and frankly, they've offered these silly impeachable offenses up and they go unchallenged. >> laura: maybe we should do our own impeach off. i guess the blackface -- >> trump somehow fired northam back in college days. >> laura: that doesn't even make sense. an impeach off. i will go first. the president wore golf attire into a church in northern virginia. clearly breaching presidential coat, protocol and offensive to god, man, and the constitution. >> i'm going to ph want one of you, i believe the president shamelessly supported and undermined authority of the national park service when he allowed this 11-year-old civilian took up the white house lawn in 2017. did he break underage worker laws, laura? to the president pay taxes on the tip he gave the child? a congressional inquiry of elongate -- >> laura: did he pay taxes on the tip?

what about the length of his ties? think about what could happen. i find it impeachable that the tide goes a little below the belt, meaning in a fire emergency he could put others in danger of tripping causing the secret service to reach down, pull him up, causing harm to the nation, that is clearly an appreciable difference. >> a terrible offense and there's one more that i just thought of. what if last week we saw the photographic evidence that the president is careless with money? look at this video. no wallet, no paper clip, no money clip, no rubber band, the president just shoves currency in his back pocket, it's clear he's getting ready to bribe somebody. >> laura: you can't see it but he has a lot of currency. >> they will have to immediately inquire. >> laura: you won the impeach off. the last bite is next. so when my windshield broke... >> woman: what?! >> vo: ...i searched for someone who really knew my car. i found the experts at safelite autoglass. >> woman: hi! >> vo: with their exclusive technology, they fixed my windshield...

then recalibrated the camera attached to my glass so my safety systems still work. who knew that was a thing?! >> woman: safelite has service i can trust. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪

♪ >> laura: it's time for the last bite. all right, well, she is surging in the polls in the media is enthralled by her every word, but elizabeth warren was caught off guard when a reporter asked

her this. >> under a worn administration, which are vice president's child be allowed -- >> no. i don't know. i have to go back and look at the details. >> laura: cannot buy a vowel? apparently she doesn't have a plan for that. that's all the time left for tonight, good for that reporter, we will find out who that is. shannon bream and the "fox news @ night" team to go from here. shannon. >> shannon: if only we had something to talk about, laura. we will find something. thank you so much. it would begin with fox news alert. news tonight, the focus now turns to the whistle-blower and the acting director of national intelligence. set to testify before congress in just hours. we are digging into night about the details of what the whistle-blower claims happened, who it is, what the inspector general for the intelligence community has to say about the possible political motivation, a bit of breaking news that that complaint has been declassified, we may get it in this hour, we are working on that. also going to hear