>> sean: he keeps his promises, cut taxes, originalist judgejustices, killed baghdadi, pulling the wall -- promises made and kept. we will never be the media mob. let not your heart be troubled, laura ingraham, take it away. >> laura: hannity, don't you think the trick they've been trying to pull -- i'm going to get into this tonight -- this thing is one of those fake, toy guns that ends up backfiring on the person trying to play with it. >> sean: you know what it's like? >> laura: a stupid gambit the democrats have made, and they're about to blow all of these moderate democrat seats because they are all tying their boats to nancy's anchor, and they're not going to anchor to anything. >> sean: let them keep being stupid. don't tell them. >> laura: [laughs] hannity, creature tonight, as always appeared on laura ingraham, this is "the ingraham angle" from a very busy washington night. a really positive day, that's

the picture painted by republicans today, after testimony from one of schiff's witnesses, as i just mean mentid to sean, backfired. congressman give us insight in moments. the hypocrisy of the democrat leadership over impeachment has been laid bare. byron york, matt schlapp, they will walk us through it, and ed henry has news of buyer's remorse already building any democrat caucus. at this hour, new reporting suggesting the whistle-blower who kicked this entire drama off might have had his own issues with a conflict of interest. you will not believe for whom it looked like he works. lee smith, victor davis hanson will spell it all out. but first, the democrat's witching hour, that's the focus of tonight's halloween "angle." today, house democrats embarrassed themselves by passing a resolution to approve

an impeachment inquiry that they had already been conducting for weeks behind closed doors. now, from the beginning, their pattern of leaking and lying to damage trump in an election year, of course, was so obvious. it was so cheesy, it reminds me of one of those old movies that kind of scare you as a kid, but then made you laugh as an adult. >> these creatures are very haunting. ♪ >> why did you push camilla? >> stop saying that! >> she doesn't like people coming in here. >> oh, my god. our house. >> laura: our house is what nancy thinks. the way pelosi and schiff act is just kind of as goofy as that, it's unbelievable. suddenly, they care about honoring the intent of the framers. speak of founders provided the

remedy. >> the founders gave the power, if need be. speak with the founders didn't want a dictator, they didn't want a monarch. >> what do we have come a monarchy or a republic? that's a constitution. >> laura: i half expected nancy to show up in a revolutionary waistcoat, but thankfully, republicans are calling this out for the horror show it is. >> this impeachment is not only an attempt to undo the last election, it's an attempt to influence the next one, as well. this is not what democrats promised when they entered the majority 11 months ago. i guess it's only fitting you take this boat on halloween. >> laura: and on halloween, people are looking for treats, and democrats only offered lame tricks. like the absurd notion that they are approaching this solemn moment with open minds.

>> only the facts and how we respond to them will dictate the outcome. >> i make no prejudgment as to whether that remedy will be warranted. >> laura: then they tried to disguise their venal motive by wrapping themselves -- mummifying themselves in the constitution. >> it is the duty of this house to vindicate the constitution, to honor the oath to defend the constitution that each of us took, we must move forward with this impeachment inquiry. >> laura: well, we see through all of this. dressing it all up as uncle sam didn't make them any more credible. >> it isn't about partisanship, it's about patriotism. >> we are here today because grave, dedicated patriots are standing up for their country. >> laura: dedicated public servants would be doing the

people's work of passing an infrastructure bill, the usmca, and lowering the cost of prescription drugs. but none of that is happening. they are dedicated all right, they are dedicated to the art of really bad acting. >> i take no joy in contemplating the impeachment of a president. >> it's not a decision that any of us make slightly. >> today was a solemn day, one that none of us really looked forward to. >> laura: this entire thing is a "saturday night live" skit, okay? they have been dying to have this day happen. they've been looking forward to this since the moment trump put his hand on the bible. yet a democrat dirty trick that started this whole thing, the so-called whistle-blower, the guy who took his case to schiff staff first is what really blows the lid off this entire saga. according to real clear investigation, he worked for biden -- yes, he worked for biden -- on ukraine policy when biden was vp.

he worked for deep state henchman, brendan, too appeared on the whistle-blower also reportedly worked for susan rice -- no conflict of interest here at all. more on this later on in the show. none of these democrats, though, in the end, the first movie clip made clear, should be taken seriously. they are partisans, they have no philosophy or agenda that will actually end up making our lives better. their policies, to the extent that there are any, spot only economic misery and less freedom for you and for me. it's an understatement to say that this is a witch hunt. but remember, witches have their day, but we all know what happens to them in the last re real. ♪ ♪

>> laura: ouch. and that's the "angle." joining me now are three republican congressmen on the front lines of this fight, lee zeldin, house foreign affairs committee member pete chris stewart, and mike turner. members of the house intel committee. congressman zell then, let's start with you, adam schiff said tonight that he may release transcripts next week, when y'all are off. is that enough? >> that would be fantastic. i would love to be able to have a conversation with you, with my constituents, with the american public not based off the lies and leaks that have been coming from adam schiff and other house democrats and house democratic staffs. instead, we could read it for themselves. there is an reo speed wagon song, i heard it from a friend who -- your member that one? third and fourth hand -- that's right. third and fourth hand information, and adam schiff would like to right his parity where he doesn't revealed --

>> laura: let's say he does reveal it. you are like the dog who catches the car. let's say he releases the transcript. i asked, is that enough for you? >> there's a lot -- as far as it, that's one part of it. the resolution that passed today says that adam schiff has the authority to release the transcripts, but doesn't guarantee they are going to be released. he has been talking about releasing transcripts, but i will believe it when i see it. i think it would be a fantastic thing to have it out there, because they have already leaked out the information they feel can be favorable for them. what they obviously haven't leaked is the rest of the story. in some cases, if the other 90% of the story or the other 100% of the story, so getting those transcripts out would be fantastic. i don't know how he does that does that. >> laura: well, democrats say this is all about upholding the constitution, but where are the high crimes and misdemeanors? it's an important question given the national security council

official testimony today. i want to be clear, i was not concerned anything illegal was discussed on trump's july 25th call with the ukrainian president peered congressman stuart, if an nfc official who is not a trompe l'oeil list doesn't buy the democrats argument, why should the american people? >> that's -- what difference does it make what any of these officials think? anyone can read the transcript from it's only a few pages long. every american can lead this and make their own determination. laura, got to go back. are we supposed to take them seriously? >> laura: i don't even think we should respond to this stuff. it's so ridiculous. i would let them show up to an empty chamber. >> it's too funny not to respond. they are like a bunch of spoiled children of the rich uncles funeral. like you said, they are giddy over this, they have been looking for this for three years. and for them to pretend, you know he does parody, and now we

know schiff does drama, as well peered >> laura: he was responding to some of his concerns of the so-called republican stunt. watch. >> given the kind of circus-like tactics, the storming of scif and all this, we can't surrender the process to the minority party. >> laura, when you started with is incredibly important. they have been planning this ever since trump was first elected. the majority of the people who voted today for impeachment were already publicly for impeachment before the ukraine call even happened. but what's interesting about the vote today, because adam schiff is doing this in secret. and they have had no access to any information. they didn't see tim morrison today. transcripts are not just enough, they should have seen tim's professionalism, integrity. >> laura: that's interesting point. if you're going to do something this important, you want to see everything. >> you want to know the veracity. >> laura: the way they respond

to certain questions -- sorry for interrupting you. >> that's okay. the news screams all over today that tim morrison said there was quid pro quo. he did not appear the only reason the news says that is the news wasn't able to be present at watched, adam schiff is controlling the information that comes out. we are gagged, we cannot say what didn't happen, but tim morrison did not say quid pro quo. when he has direct knowledge of, not as lee was saying, those people had a friend who had a friend. >> laura: does he directly contradict or substantially contradict some of what looked lieutenant colonel vindman said? >> i can characterize, and that is he is causing questions. but vindman was a detail lead, a sign for the military peered he reported to tim morrison. tim has the direct knowledge and information that access. you take kurt volker's testimo

testimony, who i have a great deal of admiration for, this investigation, if it had been made public, would be over. >> laura: congressman stewart, liz cheney raised an issue that i thought was very important. you both sit on intel. watch. >> we are at a moment where the nation faces grave, significant, ongoing threats, and she has completely neutered the intelligence committee. she said they must be focused on a partisan impeachment process, and not their oversight obligations. >> laura: this is consuming capitol hill, the media, and we know the reasons they want this president not to run for reelection -- that's what they really want. but her point is something i hadn't even prickly thought of much. >> it's absolutely true. we have had one, laura, one hearing on anything other than this in two months. >> laura: [laughs] my god. >> we are likely to not over the next few months, and by the way, that's not why mike and i and others want to be on the intelligence committee peered we love the fact it was generally t

wasn't in front of the cameras, and it's important work. and by the way, such as intel committee, appropriations process, we headed toward a government shutdown because the appropriations process isn't going forward. add a couple democrats telling friends they can't support a bill because we can't work with you while we are in the middle of this. >> laura: you both agree, and i sensed this, some buyers remorse with the moderate democrats who voted for this resolution, the same ones who flipped districts that trump won in 2016, who claimed they were going to work with president trump, they were going to be new types of democrats. don't worry, we are not like -- and here's a list, put it up, please. every single one of these congressman has tied themselves to pelosi and schiff. each and every one of them is now vulnerable in the next election -- each and every one of them. the republicans should pick off all of those seats. congressman zeldin, speaker nancy pelosi insists that

impeachment is not distracting them from actually working on important legislation. >> i'm going to answer it one time. these rules are fairer than anything that has gone before in terms of an impeachment proceeding. i'm not here to answer what the republicans say. if you have any questions, we are doing appropriations, where doing trade, we are doing drug prices, lowering the cost of drug prices. >> laura: wait, wait, congressman zeldin, i must have missed all that stuff she was doing. when has that happened? >> yeah, i'm missing it, as well. today, we could have had a vote to ratify the usmca. today, we could have had a vote on what is a bipartisan package to actually lower the cost of prescription drug prices that passed unanimously out of the energy and commerce committee. but instead, we have total gridlock. and while you were playing some clips earlier in the show of people talking about how it was a solemn day, they are not to have to do it -- when i got on

the house floor for that boat today, staff was going around begging members not to cheer and clap once the vote got to 218. they are beside themselves, happy about this moment, despite the fact that a total gridlock and it's ripping our country in half. they are enthusiastic about it. >> laura: giddiness. you could sense that everyone got the memo from pelosi and schiff. don't gloat, right? but they are gloating at a moment of impeachment based on a whistle-blowers complaint who used to work for joe biden. and i bet knew about hunter biden getting the sweetheart deal with bre's mom. i do plan this out right now -- and reliev read the script latet i bet the whistle-blower knew exactly what was going out of hunter biden, and apparently that wasn't a big deal, but worrying about it is in wanting to root out corruption is a problem. >> just as you are saying with the whistle-blower, the statute

that allows a whistle-blower to make a complaint is supposed to be about the intelligence community, to hold them at base of the don't you abuse the powers we give them. it's not about the president. our committee, the intelligence committee, is also not supposed to be about the president, or even foreign policy. it's supposed to be about the intelligence community, empowering them and restricting them. we are not doing our work. nancy pelosi is telling them not to be giddy, but she's telling them also not to work. all of the things that she says are happening aren't happening here they need to get to work. >> laura: you will find out more when you go back home, but the american people see this, and everyone is in the corners. but i think most people is just trying to put their kids through school, hoping to keep the pay going, maybe take a vacation every now and then if they can. they see this and think, is this america? this is like a third world country, the way they are running this thing on capitol hill? >> no question, the democrats know it's unfair, it's absurd to impeach a president in secret. they have always known that.

and they were betting the american people were too stupid to care or too dumb to notice. >> laura: may have the veil of transparency now, we're going to open it up -- what exactly are they opening up? what? >> very little. but are they going to do? how do they go back and recreate seven weeks of secret hearings? how do they go back and fix that? and i suppose they are going to have some in open session now, but are they going to bring in the same witnesses and ask the same questions? as we said earlier, the transcripts aren't enough. you need to see these witnesses. >> laura: it's like putting a prom dress on a corpse and then taking it to homecoming and saying she is going to be queen. this is ridiculous at this point. as serious as this is, this has become a farce and a comedy show. i was going to say they should keep their day job, but most of them should lose their day jobs. guys, thank you so much good great to see all of you. we will be in touch when you get back here in town. what do we know about the whistle-blower's identity? lee smith, victor davis hanson are here next.

plus, could republicans on the house judiciary committee actually call adam schiff as a witness? a member of that committee is here to tell us, next.

♪ >> we take no joy in having to move down this road and proceed with the impeachment inquiry. but neither do we shrink from it. >> laura: nominated in the category of best supporting actor in an ongoing drama, adam schiff. except he wouldn't be, because i was bad acting. schiff couldn't be more pleased than with his placement at the center of this sham. he doesn't think it is solemn, he things that's necessary, busy because he thinks

it's -- congressman doug collins is presenting a challenge to the california congressman. >> here's my challenge to mr. schiff. you want to be ken starr? star. come to the judiciary committee, be the first witness, and take every question asked of you. [applause] starting with your own involvement with the whistle-blower. >> laura: here now is arizona congresswoman debbie lesko, member of the house judiciary committee. first of all, what is your committee's message to schiff tonight? is this going to happen? >> adam schiff is a known liar and sleeker, so it wouldn't surprise me at all of the real collusion story was him colluding with the whistle-blower. and so i welcome him to come. i hope he comes to the judiciary committee, so we can grill him under oath. hopefully he doesn't lie to the committee like he lies to the american public. >> laura: did you get the sense that it was all keeping it

under the lid today? everyone was kind of saying the same thing. we take no joy in a solemn moment. we never wanted to be here. no one's happy about -- i mean, we were watching this this morning in my kitchen, and we were literally screaming out loud laughing, because it was so obvious and so stupid, it's so bad. i was thinking, maybe i'm wrong, maybe they are so serious. >> you are exactly right, this is total acting. over the top. are you kidding me? since president trump was elected, they have been calling for his impeachment. i've been on the judiciary committee since january of this year. i mean, three or four hearings a week. all it isn't going after president trump. they hate the guy. >> laura: have you done any real, substantive work? you've done some stuff, but not a lot, have you, other than the stuff? >> most of the time, it's been undermining president trump, whether it's impeachment inquiry, and i'm also on the

homeland security committee. >> laura: just forget it. >> they call these witnesses forward to bash law enforcement, to bash the border patrol. >> laura: what do you say to people who are looking at this, and their thinking, well, i'm kind of an independent, i'm not democrat or republican. we got an election year coming up next year. if you vote for a democrat, given what they have done to paralyze the government this year, what does that bring the american people in 2021? >> you know, i would say to an independent out there, someone who is really fair-minded, this is not a fair process. it's a total, political hit job on the president. and why don't the democrats wait until the 2020 election? i mean, why do they have to impeach him? the only reason i can think of is there afraid is going to get reelected? >> laura: it's the only way to get him out of office. congresswoman, great to see you pay thank you for joining me. speak with great to see you. >> the whistle-blower is

unpatriotic. they shouldn't even go near th them. >> laura: not only do the democrats want to keep the whistle-blower from testifying, they don't even want americans to know his name. now we might know why. new reporting from real clear investigations reveals troubling ties. first, they say he was detailed to the national security council in 2015, under susan "unmask 'em" rice peered quickly becoming biden's point man on, guess what, ukraine policy. biden's office even saw to it that he got invited to a luncheon that included then-cia director, guess who, john brennan. then fbi director jim comey. and then national intel director -- this can't even be real. this is all becoming -- get this, the report also adds that the whistle-blower "worked with the dnc operative who dug up dirt on the trump campaign during 2016. inviting her into the white house for meetings.

so let up that all sink in this halloween night. the whistle-blower invited in anti-trump dnc operative into the obama white house during the 2016 election. fox news has not itself yet confirmed this whistle-blower identity, but last week, fox news did confirm three instances of alleged bias against trump that were noted by the intel inspector general. so you do your own thinking on this. joining me now is lee smith, investigative journalist, author of the fantastic new book, huge best seller already, "the plot against the president" get along with victor davis hanson, senior fellow at the hoover institution. we are not going to name this person, we haven't independent they confirm the name, but because you call yourself a whistle-blower, does not entitle you under any law to remain anonymous. and you aren't considered a

roving inspector general of the executive branch of the white house, either. do americans have the right to know who this was -- is? >> whistle-blowers are mavericks, laura. they come forward, get in the light of day, make accusations or charges or revelations, they take the heat. this person hasn't done any of that. he is only known to the democratic members officially of the house intelligence committ committee, but what they whistle-blower -- i can't understand, and it's incoherent, the whistle-blower and lieutenant colonel vindman have made more implicit charges that trump was too easy on the russians, too hard on the ukrainians. he mixed the personal and professional come had a quid pro quo, but they were in the white house, in the case of the whistle-blower, and lieutenant colonel vindman was born services, so why didn't they say from 2011 onward, why didn't they say the obama administration will not arm the ukrainians? trumpeted that. why don't they say -- trump risked a war, cable 200

mercenaries, canceled a missile deal. he's been the hardest person on putin we have seen in the last ten years. why didn't they say hunter biden was engaging -- wit joe biden wh his son, a quid pro quo. why didn't they say, my gosh, we have barack obama engaging in quid pro quo with a hot mic in south korea. all of the things they are revealing right now happened, and they didn't say a word. you know why that was? because under obama, he tolerated no leaks. they would have been facing criminal prosecution, or at least been monitored like the associated press reporters or fox's owns james rosen. in the media would have demonized them. >> laura: lee smith, if this were a whistle-blower, reporting on obama, victor is right, the media would have already published his name. if they would have investigated and publicized every detail of a conflict of interest, and probably his or her life would

be destroyed. period. >> we have a very recent example of how people calling out democratic abuses are treated. if you see the way kash patel and derek harvey, both have worked for congressman nunes, the way they are being dragged through the press for finding out the different abuses -- >> laura: need to sue for defamation. i said this last night, both should sue for defamation for what was done to them. >> that's our whistle-blowers -- real whistle-blowers are treated. there dragged through the mud. the person we are describing to the whistle-blower appears to be something of an entire different nature. >> laura: let's put up the bullet points just describing what we seem to know, what has been reported. real clear investigation. how accurate do you think this is? >> i think it is an excellent article. >> laura: cia officer at the white house come expertise with ukraine, worked for biden, worked for rice, worked for obama, also invited red flags

for political bias, ties with a 2020 democratic candidate, joe biden says he worked for him. to me, when you look at this, victor davis hanson, this all starts to sound and feel and smell like what happened with the set up of the russia investigation. in the same actors, the same players, the same motivations. and it's all to stop this america first president or candidate, back then, in a president, who wanted to take a different approach to foreign aid and a different approach to foreign policy, they wanted him out. the deep state wanted him out, the intel community wanted him out. foreign policy establish experts wanted him out. they couldn't figure it out because the american people kind of like these ideas. >> yeah, they did, and apparently the whistle-blower and lieutenant colonel vindman did too because donald trump, as i said earlier, has been very pro-ukrainian, anti-russian, and quite do anything like joe biden, course he didn't come in barack obama, these quid pro

quos. you would think after 22 months and 35 million, that bar would have been raised higher for impeachment hysteria, but in fact, it's gone really low, the reason it has as we are only a year away from the election. and we are looking at a horowitz report, a barr and their own report, and you look at these debates, and no agenda that pulls 51%, and the democrats have decided we don't have a choice, destroy donald trump or we are going to lose this election. they can't wait, or as general mcraven said, mcraven said he's got to be removed sooner the better. imagine a retired general saying that. i was one of the scariest things i've heard. >> laura: they are basically saying thank god for the deep state. they think the deep state is their check on this president. >> if i were them, i would watch that. one of the big questions that should come out of this, what is going on right now at the cia? you've heard very good things

about the director, but once you strip away the bells and whistles, what we are looking at right here is an active serving cia officer who is part of an operation to undo an election. >> laura: that's terrifying for any future president. setting aside trump, and a president could be subject to this bid lee and victor come important stuff tonight. in moments, the media still fantasizing about nancy pelosi sitting in the oval office herself. what caused the pelosi to go from a impeachment skeptic to cheerleader? byron york, matt schlapp, ed henry sound off next.

♪ >> taken an oath to protect and defend the constitution, and that is what we cannot ignore, and we will not ignore, when the president's behavior indicates that that investigation, that inquiry is necessary. >> laura: speaker pelosi really laying it on today, but

she was singing a different tune about impeachment just months ago. >> if and when the time comes for impeachment, it will have to be something that is such a crescendo, in a bipartisan way. >> laura: well, no republican voted for today's impeachment resolution, so what changed pelosi's mind? enemy now, byron york, chief political correspondent for the matt schlapp, and ed henry, fox news correspondent. matt, how does pelosi go from skeptic to embracing all democrats all the time for impeachment? >> let's think the first thing, they've had previous votes that couldn't get a majority. but the real dynamic here is aoc and the squad, and this new radical group of folks that are in her caucus, and they were not going to allow her to get out of this impeachment. as soon as they got the majority, they were going to impeach donald trump here from the very first moment he won his election, they wanted to get rid

of him any which way they could. >> laura: byron, we have all these moderate democrats, we ran the scroll earlier. 31, and they are now tied to aoc plus three. they ran as moderates. what happens to the next? >> we will see. they will end up voting to impeach chemical all the way over. this started on january 20th, 2017. the rash and "the washington post" ran an article about impeaching trump, and he had only been president for 19 minutes. we have had a number of efforts earlier to impeach the president. one last thing. if you remember back in the clinton years, republicans thought clinton got away with murder. he got away with whitewater, got away with file gate, travel gate, and when monica lewinsky happened, they got him. democrats feel this way appear they couldn't get him on russia, they couldn't get him on the emoluments clause, and when ukraine happened, they just

jumped. >> laura: ed henry, i understand you might have some news tonight about the communications team at the white house vis-a-vis impeachment. >> sources close to the white house are telling me they are closing in on bringing -- she was a fox news contributor, he worked at the treasury department, instrumental in helping shape the message on the successful tax cut by president trump. bring him in as a lead spokesperson on impeachment pushback. why this would be significant does remember some of the troubles the staff had, explaining this back in the clinton days, of course, the context here -- sometimes you've got to get it out of the day today staff that that is already there, and bring in some fresh legs, fresh minds, and look at this a different way. understand he's got support, not just in the building at the white house, but folks outside the white house like donald trump jr. and others have thought this is a good idea, in private, to bring in some season communication veterans to help

his father. the president can often be his own best spokesman and -- not just help, leave the shaping of the message on practically everything. you see tony there, he got high marks inside the administration for helping treasury secretary minutia and, in terms of shaping the tax cut rollout, the message i mentioned, that was a big success for the white house. they think inside the white house, they need someone like him to help. >> laura: capitol hill and republican leadership have been saying we need a system of communication here. obviously, the legal strategy is critical going forward, but they needed a point person, and i think this is probably very good news. >> the thing that is so strange about this impeachment is it's during a presidential election, we can't get beyond this. with nixon and clinton, they had already won mexican terms, this is right in the middle of the election, and its critical people know exactly where to go to get the answers on what to say about pushing back on this

ridiculous impeachment efforts, and republicans don't know where to go right now. president trump's attitude has been i didn't do anything wrong, i don't need a war room. clinton had a war room, it was actually quite effective, he had every single democrat in the senate in line for him, and these members of congress need some sort of leadership. and they need to know how to argue this, and they are not -- >> laura: they don't how to argue this. i mean, this is about the easiest thing to argue. people don't know how to argue this, they literally shouldn't even be in congress. today, i said the republican party has finally arrived on capitol hill, because they are seeing some concern bubbling up, even among the democrats who felt they had to vote for this resolution, but i still believe there is a chance that they might not end up going all the way for impeachment. i want to play something for all of you, and ed, maybe you can

react to this. over at msnbc, they laid out a path that would end up with a president pelosi at the end of it. watch. >> anything change, donald trump is no longer at the top of this web of corruption, but pence is at the top of it. >> you can impeach pens first, but then donald trump would have to name his replacement, but i think may be a deal could be struck where he was told, if you don't make a replacement, the nancy pelosi does become president. >> laura: here is the argument, gentlemen. if trump and pence are both implicated, pence resignation or removal from office workers first, trump could nominate a new vice president, rejection of a trump vice presidential choice with an elevated pelosi, in the event that the trump's removal from office after an impeachment trial the senate.

now, this is the level of fantasy that they are engaged in. they are dreaming. if they say it is a solemn moment, but they are dreaming of impeachment fantasies. they are supposed to be dreaming about the holiday season. >> it makes me wonder who in the democratic party thought about rolling this out on halloween. inow your tongue what fantasy land, not halloween pit first we do this, then we do that. haven't impeach him, let alone removed him with a trial in the senate, and as you know, a lot of democrats in private will admit, it's not just republicans saying this. it's going to be a heavy lift, even if they impeach him in the house, where they may have about because nancy pelosi is in charge, as you laid out. removing him in the senate is a much higher mountain to climb, and it's highly unlikely, as a look at the facts tonight. this is fantasy. >> that is, in fact, he coup fantasy.

we have seen misuse of that word, but you could depose trump, depose it pence and make nancy pelosi president, it's not a good look for them because it actually is a coup fantasy. both clinton and nixon -- the impeachment occurred after they had been reelected. at this time, we have never seen this happen before. and you have the opposition party and the democrats hope that if they handle this well, they will damage trump's chances for reelection. >> laura: it looks like election were meddling. for two years, they said that trump was working with russians to meddle in elections, but this looks like you're trying to disenfranchise 60 plus million people from voting for this president. >> it's simple, if you don't want trump to win, beat him. it's a year away, folks. nominate somebody saying and beat him. he >> laura: have to do it with warren or biden. >> maybe hillary. >> laura: or maybe someone else beer gentlemen, thank you, we had so much more to get to on the following fright night.

now that the democrats have taken the next step on impeachment, how should the white house fight back? you just heard about their communications attempt, but what else? a former clinton impeachment manager and former doj lawyer walks us through it in moments. (male announcer) it's here. the rut. it only happens once a year, when the bucks start chasing does. and it's time for you to start chasing the bucks. for the next two weeks, this is where you'll be because this is what you live for. it's your season so hurry to bass pro shops and cabela's for huge savings on the gear you need from top brands like herter's, redhead and cabela's. the go hunt sale is going on now.

♪ >> democrats are desperate. they are desperate. they have nothing. we really call them the do-nothing democrats. that's the only way they're going to try to win the election this way, because they can't win the fairway. they are trying to impeach the president of the united states. >> laura: the last two nights, i have laid out how senate republicans should respond to the impeachment stampede which of the white house to? turn to me and i was bob barker, former congressman and clinton

prosecutor. and robert disco robert driscoll. you say he want me impeachment battle because democrats had a struggling but not impeachable safe harbor appeared what is the trump white house message now? >> making political arguments, but the reason clinton won is not all the senators were huge fans of what he had done, but they have the out of being able to say, i'm not happy with it, but that's not an impeachable offense, and we have to focus on what the country is doing, and i think trump will give a little room. it's a victory for him so long as he is not removed. if he keeps all republicans on board, he wins. he's got to give a little of a safe harbor appeared i know he is tempted to attack anybody who is not totally in his corner, but has to give those people a little safe harbor to say, i'm a little troubled by what happened, but i don't think it is close to an impeachable offense, and then

pivoted to the process issues they are focusing on. >> laura: see or not suggesting a fruit cake to mitt romney or anything? >> no, but -- >> laura: don't swing at every pitch. here is how democrats are responding to the charges that they are polluting the process. >> republicans say the rules are unfair. are they? >> no, in fact, the rules are very much the same as they were in the clinton and nixon impeachment. >> transparent, open, and frankly, more transparent and more open, giving more privileges to the president then were given in the past. >> laura: you were there for one of the impeachment. is this revisionist history? >> it is bizarro world all over again. they are operating on two different wavelengths entirely. the rules in the past, beginning with the inquiry of impeachment back in 1998, and the rules under which the judiciary committee operated properly, as the only committee out of

congress that has the power to impeach any responsibility, it was completely different, open, transparent, fair, both sides had equal access to witness and subpoenas. even if they clothed it, the emperor has no clothes, and i'm talking about adam schiff. there is no transparency, no relatrelationship to what we din 1998. democrats know that, but this is what they are going on, and i think they will sync with it. >> laura: bob driscoll, one of the things that's amazing, when they're back from ten days off, they come in, and as this begins, this impeachment process begins, the white house's lawyer will be able to, what, cross-examine witnesses? but only if adam schiff says yes, if they have turned over all the documents. so if they give up all their rights, then maybe they can ask

a few questions? >> the word nay appears a lot in the resolution. there's not a lot of lust in there. the house is in control. they can impeach them for whatever they want, whatever ridiculous reason they want, but in this instance, they are not in a court of law. if the public is the judge, so if the public feels it's unfair, they won't support. they are worrying about process too much -- no, not really, because of the public is the judge, because it's a political process. politicians respond to the public. the public thinks it's not fair, than the public won't buy into impeachment. we've seen it already, the minimal procedures they have now are only because people were unaware of how unfair it was. >> laura: on another network, schiff appeared with chris cuomo, trying to say this is all going to be great at the hearing. watch. >> what do you think will happen during public hearings that will change how people feel about this? >> people will hear from the

witnesses directly. if they will have a much better sense of what took place. >> laura: that didn't work out so well a mueller, did it? bob barr? >> it didn't comment i think we have to keep in mind, president reagan and president clinton were both expert communicators, and the reason they both did so well, as president, in many ways, as they went over congress and directly to the american people. that's what this president needs to do, and that's what members of congress need to do. they need to stop getting in the weeds. they need to get to the american people. >> laura: directly to them. a gentleman excellent conversation. when we come back, a very special "last bite." you can find it in the vitamin aisle in stores everywhere. prevagen. healthier brain. better life.

>> they may prevent some of these witnesses from testifying and prevent the american people from learning the full fact around the president's misconduct, but even as they do that, they will be building a case against the president for

obstructing the constitutional duties of congress. >> laura: oh, really, where did you go to law school? if you invoke exec of privilege or any type of privilege set in precedent and you exercise your rights when it becomes an article of impeachment? nice catch 22 you want to put the president in. ain't going to work adam schiff there that's all the time we have. shannon bream and the "fox news @ night" team take it from here. >> shannon: are we going to have to go back to law school laura? i don't want to take the bar again. >> laura: we know the law, most people don't appear to be a >> shannon: we begin tonight with fox news alert. know that republicans voted for it, all but two democrats did. pushing through the impeachment resolution on the house floor today. republicans claiming it is a sham, saying the new rules only give house intel chair adam schiff more power, not the g.o.p. or the president. now both sides are preparing for the whole thing in a matter of weeks to go public but also on th