the new jersey mayor said it was impossible to draw any other conclusion. >> sean: isn't that the same group, nicholas sandmann, black hebrew israelites? if i recall right? let not your heart be troubled, we are not the hate-trump media. laura ingraham, i got to see you along with tucker earlier this evening. you are funny. >> laura: hannity, i can't believe first of all three of us were together. how often are we all three of the same room? >> sean: i don't think it is ever happened. >> laura: once or twice, righ right? >> sean: i'm sure we will do election coverage for the channel. >> laura: okay, al all right. [laughs] yeah, together. >> sean: you two always get in trouble. >> laura: exactly, but hannity, we were doing some photos for a bunch of occasions, but i kept saying, this is going to be a heatseeking missile for pelosi, nadler, and schiff, coming right down on the studio. >> sean: just put in levin,

the freedom caucus, devin nunes. >> laura: it was great to see you tonight, shawn. fantastic show. last night and tonight. >> sean: your ratings, by the way, huge props for you last night, great job. >> laura: thanks so much, great to see you. i am laura ingraham, this is to is "the ingraham angle" from new york city. very sparkly here. you are looking live and members of the judiciary committee, look closely. wait, someone just dusted off the congressman -- oh, no. they are making their cases for and against impeachment. we will bring you the highlights and the low lights as the articles of impeachment are marked up. do they have a pen? how does that actually work? congressman jim jordan, andy biggs are there, and they will be stepping out to join us later in the hour, so don't move, okay? also tonight, the activities we found here don't vindicate anybody who touched this. that's a quote from who? the inspector general. that was one of the many monumental lies from him during

this hearing today on fisa abuse that happened all day long in the senate. so what can we do to make sure this stuff doesn't happen again? and we don't want campaigns -- of either party -- targeted by members of the deep state, intel committee members chris stewart, he has a plan, and what punishments tonight we might be finding gold i would, now that horowitz says this was back in the hands of the geo day and fbi. former attorney general jeff sessions, interesting person to talk to tonight, has intriguing thoughts, and this is great, eric trump, just saw him in the green room, he is ready to go, okay? on how this impeachment struggle could be his father's finest hour, and why nancy pelosi made a colossal mistake with turning this over to schiff. and, okay, you know there's going to be a lot of humor in the show, because raymond arroyo is here tonight. he will react "time"'s person of

the year, and we will offer our own picks. what is going on behind the scenes of tonight's impeachment hearing. you might have dipped in and out of it, but we have multiple camera angles, so we are going to show you what you didn't see if you were just watching the regular feet of this, in a little bit. all coming up. but first, be happy that we aren't forcing you to watch the pathetic proceedings over on capitol hill tonight, but just for fun, we are going to give you a little taste of it. democrats think pathetic, emotional please are going to drag them over the impeachment finish line, and may be draggy with them. you see, that is the only way they can, kind of beef up their otherwise deficient arguments. >> it matters to the waitress on an early bus for the breakfast shift. in matters to the steelworker helping to build america. >> president trump's subversive and illegal actions in seeking foreign interference are in a effrontery to our constitution,

in affronts to our founders. in affront to the suffragist who fought for women's voting rights. >> ask our kids and our family group text what they thought at this moment, and they responded, almost immediately, and confirmed the worst. their faith in our democracy is shaken. >> laura: let me say, if your family's group is what is informing your speeches tonight on the house floor, yeah, everybody's faith in it all should be shaken. well, it would be hilarious, right? if it wasn't all connected to this attempt at removing a duly elected president of the united states. republicans know these pitiful times are going to work, so they are taking a different -- and i think, much more effective path. >> the articles that we wrote after all of these hearings and all of these grand pronouncements and all of these crimes in plain sight, we get

abuse power? with no real dates on this is the abuse? we are going to give you abuse of power, go home, pick something you don't like about the president, and there is your abuse of power. >> not just because they don't like the president, they don't like us. they don't like the 63 million people who voted for this president. and they dislike us so much they're willing to weaponize the government. two years ago was the irs, more recently the fbi, and now the impeachment power of congress. >> laura: joining me and i was ken starr, former whitewater independent counsel, fox news contributor, along with robert ray, who succeeded ken as whitewater independent counsel. you both have seen this process up close and personal. can, let me start with you. what do you make of what has unfolded tonight, and in the days and weeks preceding, given what we are facing now, with these two articles of impeachment? >> the democrats have searched so hard, under every rock, for a

crime. let's return to the text of the constitution. treason. that's a crime. bribery. they hoped for bribery. and then other high crimes and misdemeanors. so the text guides the house of representatives. you need to go find a crime. but this article has essentially been shaped conceptually, i think, laura, by the law professors. the law professors came in and with a very originalist, bowed to the founding fathers, said te founding fathers were really concerned about abuse of power. the problem is that is so open-ended and capacious, it is whatever you want it to be. and here now is the other problem, the practical problem. the record of, from the democrats perspective, is at best, murky. and i think, fairly viewed, favors the president, that there was not an abuse of power. >> laura: robert, picking up where ken just left off, nadler,

in his opening statement -- look over here -- in his opening statement, hung it all on this abuse of power. watch. >> under article one of the constitution, the president can be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors. the highest of high crimes is abuse of power. it occurs when the president uses his official powers to serve his own, personal, selfish interest at the expense of the public good. the first article of impeachment charges president trump with abuse of power. >> laura: i would say, if that is the standard, then president obama, in doing that daca deal for all of the illegals to get work, i would say that is an abuse of power. that's what it's come to, robert. >> abuse of power can't be anything you would like to shoehorn into it and say it is an impeachable offense. and i have news for jerry nadler, the highest crime is treason. in the second highest crime is

bribery. and the one after that is anything that would be in the same category, that's the meaning of the word "other." which could be obstruction of justice. you would have expected these articles of impeachment to allege, in article one, something like bribery, right? and in article two, something like obstruction of justice. neither one of those are there. where we are now, this will be the first impeachment of a president to ever proceed forward without an allegation of a crime committed. >> laura: ken, i keep thinking of all of these law students, all of us went to law school. a lot of people watching might have kids going to law school now, or on their way, or grandkids. this is what new law students are being taught. that this is a silly putty approach to the constitution. when you don't like the guy, you don't like his policies, you think he is uncouth or crass, whatever they think, they can stamp it as abuse of power.

and then you are off to the races. >> right, exactly. it's so, again, open-ended. and i agree with what bob just said, you can pour anything into that vessel, whatever suits you. whatever brew you want, you pour it into, that's very, very dangerous. and so, the three presidential impeachments previously, there has, in fact, been issues of a clear and flat-out violation of law, including crimes. now, abuse of power. abuse of power, i think, has been motivated by these democrats looking back to the prior impeachments, and seeing the nixon abuse of power. but when you read the abuse of power article, talks about all manner of criminal activity. once again, i think they are stretching it beyond the textual bounds, beyond our historical balance, and the real test -- as

the speaker was saying, just three or four months ago, e get republicans -- let's put it in terms of bipartisan support, the way the nixon impeachment had enormous bipartisan support, and significant bipartisan support in the clinton years. we just don't have any of that now. and i don't think there is going to be. >> laura: have to be clear-cut, egregious, and bipartisan. speaking of this obstruction of congress article of impeachment, we are doing this on the show because it's important to proceed in a manner as we examine this. nadler in his opening statement tries to conflate nixon, as ken just said, clinton, and these facts, and claiming these facts are kind of worse. watch. >> this obstruction into context, during the watergate hearings, president nixon turned over recordings of his conversations in the oval office. later, president clinton handed

over his dna. president trump's obstruction was, by contrast, absolute. those are the facts the facts. >> laura: those are the facts, robert ray. >> look, that is not even right on the facts with the nixon impeachment. the third article which was obstruction of congress, had the least bipartisan support. in fact, two critical republicans did not support that article, but did support the article on obstruction of justice, and they were someone that i ultimately came later to work for, hamilton fitz jr. of new york, and the other one was then-congressman bill coen. so they don't even have their history right, and ken is absolutely right, and impeachment article on abuse of power that is untethered to a crime is not a well-founded article of impeachment. that is based upon not only the text of the constitution, and the constitutional debates, but also, more than 200 years of history in which we've got some background and context to

understanding what would be the type of impeachable offense that has any chance of garnering bipartisan support. this is not it. of the president's right. it is not only impeachments might, it's impeachment nonexistence. >> laura: obstruction of congress by the executive branch, not bowing down to the legislative branch on issues of privilege. how can that be, in 20 seconds, how can that be right? >> well, it's inappropriate, especially when the house of representatives was not willing to go for a judicial test, in our system of separation of powers, the two branches -- political branches and conflicts -- you go to court. the democrats did not do that periods going all right, gentlemen, great to see you both tonight. fantastic legal minds that you are. you are looking live at the house judiciary mark up of these absurd articles of impeachment, where democrats are just floundering. we are going to continue to monitor it, bring it to you live throughout the hour, but it

started off with a just pathetically embarrassing moment for the democrats, when congressman collins blew up the entire democrat narrative. >> i know they are desperate. you know how i know it? adam schiff's own words yesterday. we can't go to court, that would take too long. an election is coming. let me finish the last part, he likes to put words into president trump's mouth when he faked the call transcript. no, adam, what you need to continue to say is "we can't beat him next year. the only thing we need is a 30 30-second commercial saying we impeached him." that is th the wrong reason to impeach somebody. >> laura: all political. joining me now, the president's on, exact a vice president of the trump organization. watching this stellar display of congressional impeachment in action, they are impeaching themselves. >> you know what they are telling?

cnn would not buy a second of this sham today, it undercut the garbage they have been spewing the last two years. they wouldn't put any of it on, because it literally undercuts the narrative that most of the media has been spewing the last two years. it's unbelievable. >> laura: sheila jackson lee, i know you are spending part of christmas together, she is pushing this lie that lives were lost because of a delay in aid to ukraine. this was a shocking moment. watch. >> president trump trays the national interests by withholding vital, congressionally appropriated security to a beleaguered and besieged ally facing armed aggression from russia. many lives during that time of delay were lost in a country fighting for its survival. >> laura: well, collins went on to blow up that narrative. >> where does this whole thing start? it was obstruction, the whistle-blower, and then it was bribery, and then they were going out and pulling different

democratic people to see what word resonates best out ther there. i mean, this is just them -- they have nothing. they know they have nothing. most unfortunate person in this whole thing is nancy pelosi. she is kind of in a hysterical spot. >> laura: don't mess with me, eric. >> she knows the fund raising my father has is going through the roof. she knows their polls are going down the drain, my father's polls or literally skyrocketing. you look at swing states. but she can't get out of this. >> laura: when i watched her the other day, it seemed like her body was actually physically rejecting the words she was saying, because i didn't think she wanted to go here, but now she has to. >> she has no control. she's been in there for 32 years, and they are forced to play a game they know they're going to lose, because they are going to get to the senate on this whole thing is going to blow up, so she doesn't want to play the game, but you've got

these radical leftists on the other side forcing her to come if she is not going to play this game, she's losing her speakership, but if she plays the game, she will lose, think about the predicament she is in, it's kind of hysterical. all the while, my father's poll numbers are the best they have ever been, and he's raising an uncanny amount of money putting them in the drivers seat to beat any of these weakling candidates on the other side. >> laura: cnn and msnbc, to your point, earlier actually refused to run lindsey graham's opening statement at the senate ig hearing today. we've got horowitz up there, big hearing. if they didn't even run -- she's the head of the committee. they refused to run it. >> doesn't that tell you everything you need to know about the media? >> laura: they ran some of it at msnbc, to be fair. >> very little. they were working on impeachment all day long, i did undercuts the nonsense they have been spewing the last two years, so why would you -- i mean, that is how dishonest these people are. that is how dishonest these people are.

horowitz had some pretty damning testimony today. i think americans are seeing it for what it is, take him he's going to win this thing again, you watch. >> laura: michael bloomberg, i know you know him, how well do you know him? >> a little bit. >> laura: these billionaires hang around together. he is pouring a lot of money into some of these house races, going to put $10 million into these races that democrats, i guess, feel somewhat vulnerable. >> put a couple hundred million dollars into his race, because he is not doing well. >> laura: are you worried about him at all? he's very successful. we all admire success. >> first of all, he has no charisma. second of all, put in a lot of money and only 5%, 4%. my father jumped into the race, and he was 20% virtually day one. i think you see a bit of a dichotomy. third of all, look at all of the swing states on the states you need to win. how well does banning any soda over 8 ounces go, right?

>> laura: he said that is for the good of people. it's better for people -- >> people in pennsylvania and ohio and michigan and all of these places don't want to be told how big of a soda they have -- can be. last but not least, you let at t the hard-core lefties, they hate someone who could become a billionaire. >> laura: eric trump tonight says he's not worried about bloomberg, but are you worried about this guy? >> if i'm your president, with me, it starts here in my gut, goes to my heart, and then i articulate it. i don't trust people who, in fact, if this starts here and doesn't work its way down to the heart. >> laura: i wasn't sure which way it was working down. like, whoa, where's this conversation going? >> the other day talking about being in a pool and having kids rubs his blonde -- >> laura: leg hair? >> he's got exactly zero chance. >> laura: he is the

front-runner, still the main -- are you worried about buttigieg? >> let him be the front-runner end. >> laura: buttigieg is almost tied with him. >> i think we're going to blow them out of the water, and honestly, nancy pelosi is handing it to my father, and i'm happy about that, so keep going. >> laura: your father seems like he is in a good mood lately. my exaggerating not? i saw him last week, i've never seen him happier. you are in the middle of impeachment -- >> they want him to quit. they thought they could pile on so much from every angle, it's not worth it, go back to my nice lifestyle in florida and do all of my things. they want him to quit. it makes him double down a double down. you watch, there is never a man that has that much fire in him. >> laura: great to see you, eric. merry christmas come if i don't see you before. in the wake of michael horowitz's damning testimony, chris stewart will join us to unveil some exclusive next steps by the g.o.p. former attorney general jeff sessions is here on what should happen to the agent who

perpetrated this attempted takedown of trump. his recommendations, strong ones, stay there.

♪ >> i remember reading all of these headlines, lawful investigation with a few irregularities. everything okay, low level people kind of got off track. if that's what you get out of this report, you clearly didn't read it. >> laura: senate judiciary chair lindsey graham setting the tone for today's hearing with the doj inspector general michael horowitz. now, i hope you haven't been listening to the spin from the resistance media over the last 24 hours. forget the last 24 hours, how about over the last three years

plus? but if you have, today's hearings should have put that spin the rest, badly, for the democrats on the stage, they were confronted by the author of the ig report, and the results, at times, were devastating. >> there is a reason why they knew because they were producing useful information. >> they should be producing useful information. >> your review of those warrants would indicate that they were producing useful information, correct? >> i'm not sure that's entirely correct. >> well, they were producing information. >> i'm not sure whether i would characterize they were helpful or not. >> laura: a former top dog attorney should know, don't ask a question if you don't know the answer. my next guest is introducing legislation today to reform the fisa process. joining me and i was congressman chris stewart of the house intel

committee. today, how can you be introducing legislation today, there were numerous fisa abuses. what do we do to mount to stop us from going forward? >> with the fisa courts are essential to our national security, but if so is protecting the constitutional rights of every american citiz citizen, including supporters of president trump -- there is no question that comey and others have used that power. you are exactly right, we have to fix it. if we don't fix it, don't reform it, conservatives like me won't vote to reauthorize it. my legislation is very simple, actually, and the american people understand it. it is not hard to get, it would reform and take away some of that power and that potential abuse from director comey and director brennan's of the future. >> laura: let's talk about exculpatory information. we saw through this process, after this investigation got going, congressman, there were

multiple instances where the targets of investigation -- or people of interest, whatever you want to call them -- produced themselves information that would have indicated this theory they were somehow working with the russians was false. but that was withheld during the process. >> absolutely. look, there were 17 incidents where the information wasn't given and it should have been. the legislation we are proposing is very simple, it creates an advocate, someone who come if there is a u.s. person for the fisa court, it requires the fisa court have an advocate that would protect that person's rights. it provides for a transcript. you know, one of the things, when you read the fisa application, it begs so many questions, and he wondered, did the judges ask these very obvious things? i'm not an attorney, but i've read this thing i don't know how many times. even not an attorney, there so many -- >> laura: mind-numbing. >> did the judges actually ask these questions? we don't know because there is no transcript.

>> laura: why are the fisa judges issuing sanctions? as a judge, you can sanction the attorneys who made these representations before your court. i would like to hear from the fisa judge himself or herself in this instance, but congressman, just one example -- this is how the media spun one particular finding in the horowitz report. watch. >> michael horowitz said under oath that he found no political bias. >> there was no political bias. >> no evidence of political bias and how they launched the investigation. >> no evidence of political bias by the fbi opening this thing. >> laura: none of them obviously read the report. someone who did to senator mike lee. he put horowitz on thei on the . >> you stated several times today you did not find testimonial evidence of bias to influence the fbi's decision to conduct these operations. >> it's not the lack of evidence that you are talking about, itself evidence of bias? >> we weren't in a position -- with the evidence we had, to

make that conclusion. >> my point is, your lack of evidence here is not evidence that there was no bias. >> laura: did you hear what he said? i'm not ruling it out. contrary to all of the spin that we have heard, he can't rule out bias because he didn't have the ability to look more deeply into positive motives. all he had was what they said. were you biased? no, i wasn't. or look at the text messages they had come other than the lovebirds, page on strzok. >> look, we don't need the inspector general to tell us if there is bias, we can look at the things director comey, director brennan have said. listen to them on cnn. listen to their tweets. are they nonpolitical? oh, my heavens, they are political to the car. they are nothing but political hacks. read the text between mistress

strzok. if it looks like a pig and smells like a pig, and if you see and hear with these individuals say, you don't need the inspector general to tell us whether they are biased or not, we can make that conclusion ourselves. >> laura: congressman, thank you so much. great to see you tonight. one of the shocking regulation s from horowitz's testimony, contrary to what the media claimed, trump did not receive defense briefing on russian interference, as the fbi previously contested. in fact, they use that briefing, an informational briefing in august of 2016, to gather and record information for their counter intel probe. isn't that cute? and then they entered that information into their cross fire hurricane file. horowitz says this is obviously very disconcerting. joining us now is jeff sessions, former ag and a candidate for u.s. senate from alabama. jeff, what revelation from the

ig report of all of them really jumped out at you as the most egregious or important? >> one of the most shocking things was that a lawyer there who prepared and was involved in writing the fisa warrant apparently, flatley changed an email to further his agenda. this is unbelievable, and it certainly needs to be investigated thoroughly. it could very well be a crime. >> laura: you're talking but the carter page information, that he did work as an intel source for the government? that information was basically excised, not included, deleted. >> well, it was altered, as i understand it -- >> laura: from the email. >> in my experience, 15 years as a federal prosecutor, i've never seen anything like that. i think that is a stunning development in the seriousness

of a fisa warrant, involving a presidential campaign. i also thought, you are correct to point out, he absolutely did not say there was no bias, he just said the investigation had revealed no bias, as he saw it. attorney general barr has more information. laura, the inspector general can only investigate or interview people now on the department of justice payroll. he cannot interview cia -- >> laura: limited. >> anyone else. >> laura: this is limited. i want to ask you about peter strzok's involvement, je jeff, in that august 2016, 2017, 2016 briefing, apparently mike flynn and another individual from the campaign. where you at that briefing, august 17th, 2016? speaker repeat that? >> laura: august 17th, 2016, were you one of the individuals in the room being briefed by the

government about the russians? they didn't name the third person, but peter strzok was involved in drafting the fbi portion of that briefing, specifically the way the asian involved, the special agent involved, was discussing the matter with the campaign, as strzok was involved in the counter intel investigation. how is that right? >> this is very, very troubling to me. let me tell you what a low level, peripheral person like paige or papadopoulos, were not on the inside of the trump campaign. if the fbi had information that those people may be involved, unsecure activities connected to foreign powers, they should warn the campaign, normally. the right thing to do is to say mr. president, campaign manager, these individuals, we have

troubling information about them. you should be very careful with them. we suggest you should not associate with them. instead of trying to shoehorn an investigation that might have, they hope, maybe would develop information about the president. you should only be seeking -- to protect the campaign, the campaign leaders, the president. >> laura: yeah, well, they didn't do that. >> barr mentioned that. barr has made that point. i think it is a very valid point. >> laura: simply put to you, jeff, what should it durum do now? we know a lot of these facts, for whatever reason, horowitz didn't want to come to those conclusions are didn't feel it was his place, perhaps. given what we know now, what do you hope that durham actually concludes? >> i know john durham. i respect him highly. i asked him to do an important matter for me, shortly after i became attorney general.

he has the power that mueller has. >> laura: what should he do? >> he needs to interview all of the people involved in this. he has the ability to interview people outside the department of justice. he can interview brennan come he can interview clapper, he can interview all of the people at the cia, the defense department, the state department, and figure out exactly what happened. >> laura: doesn't does look like entrapment? senator, doesn't does look like entrapment to you? horowitz said today that they can't include it was entrapment, but does it look like it was entrapment? or an attempt to entrap the campaign in this snare of a phony, you know, russian collusion investigation. >> what i would say to you is that we have to know how this happened. there is every right for that to occur, just as the president is said not to be above the law, neither are intelligence officers or fbi agents or

lawyers. in the department of justice or any other agency. so mr. durham has to get to the bottom of this, help the american people will not accept. >> laura: we got to go, senator, but we are people still working in the fbi, still there, who are part of this. they all have to go, and someone has to pay a legal price for this, beyond just losing his or her job. attorney general sessions, thank you so much. great to see you tonight. the impeachment hearings just wrapped vehicle congressman jordan, biggs are making their way to the cameras. we will talk to them in a bit. but coming up, "time" has chosen their person of the year. raymond arroyo and i will choose ours, and a lot more, in "seen and unseen," next. ip will crack. these friends were on a trip when their windshield got chipped. so they scheduled at safelite.com. they didn't have to change their plans or worry about a thing. i'll see you all in a little bit. and i fixed it right away

with a strong repair they can trust. plus, with most insurance a safelite repair is no cost to you. >> customer: really?! >> tech: being there whenever you need us that's another safelite advantage. >> singers: safelite repair, safelite replace.

>> laura: it's time for our "seen and unseen" segment where we expose the big cultural stories of the day. >> "time" magazine chooses its person of the year, in spite of its own reader poll, and of the

"seen and unseen" impeachment markup. joining us now with the details, raymond arroyo, fox news contributor and never scrooge. let's start with 16-year-old greta thunberg being selected as a a "time"'s person of the year. >> this might be the biggest dud since "time" started -- >> laura: oh, she's cute. >> certainly indignant, but is she really come as the magazine claims, the person who had the most influence on the world? she dropped out of school to become a junior protester. >> laura: she graduated, though. >> i think it is a horrible example to kids. just go to protest -- >> laura: she's done very well. >> i know she sales around the globe to help the environment, but this is not sailor of the year. for a 16-year-old, she is incredibly world-weary. >> as often as i can, i try to say no to having meetings with politicians.

it is just more talk, basically. and, of course, they want to take selfies. i'm a bit tired of selfies right now. >> no more selfies for her. if there is mention, "time" conducted its own poll for person of the year, and 27 million votes were cast. the hong kong protesters were chosen by a majority, 30%, but i guess "time" believes climate change protesters are more important than human rights protesters. the "time" editors selected entertainer of the year. lizzo. there she is. >> laura: i don't know who that is. >> this is the same singer went to lakers game, wore a dress with the rear cut out of it, and she twerked in front of children, god, and everyone. i don't know how we got from ella fitzgerald and frank sinatra to lizzo. she sat back in a lakers seat. this is the disinfectant of the year, which i hope the next guy who sits in that chair will be

using. >> laura: was she actually naked on the bottom? >> i don't know why we didn't show it. >> laura: well, it's on twitter. we are saying kids can't see -- kids watch the show. they can't see it. >> let me tell you, it's shocking. >> laura: an entire behind is exposed. >> who would you have selected as the person of the year? >> laura: i agree with the people voting for the hong kong protesters. they are putting their lives in danger. they are not being celebrated on late night tv shows, but they are putting their lives in danger. some of them have been killed. wounded badly, targeted. they have to wear facial masks. >> they are influencing the world. >> laura: they are influencing the world. more u.s. companies are pulling out of china because it is an inhospitable place to do business and the human rights violation, facial recognition, the uighur muslims, i think they

are brave to stand for their freedom. and no offense to greta thunberg, who is passionate and did well in her homeschooling. she got letter as and bs. but i think the hong kong protesters -- my second choice would be house intel members, devin nunes -- who was maligned by the elite. >> i have terrible choices. the first for person of the year -- again, who was the most influential? i think it was the cgi artists responsible for the biggest blockbuster of the year, "avengers and game," all cgi. they tried to shave 40 years off of robert de niro in "the irishman" paper and they made baby yoda. my second was going to be nancy pelosi for endangering her party, but i want to move on to this, laura. peeling back the curtain of what is really happening at these hearings -- we don't have time, they are telling me. i will have to bring that to you later. >> laura: are we doing it on fox nation? >> we will do it on fox nation. let me tell you, unbelievable

what is really going on behind the scenes. i all of these great videos. >> laura: oh, no. we need another hour. shannon bream, raymond is here. >> i'm going to shannon. >> laura: i went in the along with jeff sessions. up next, we take you inside the judiciary markup. congressman andy biggs was in the room and joins us live from capitol hill next.

♪ >> laura: as we've been showing you all night, the house judiciary committee continues to debate the articles of impeachment before it is sent to the house floor. sometime next week for a vote. but what is really going on inside that room? joining me now is exclusive insight, four guys who had to sit through with this, congressman andy biggs, matt schlapp, jim jordan just got dragged into a meeting, but

he might be coming out any moment vehicle congressman bigs, let's start with you. i'm watching this thing unfold, and just for the viewers who missed it, it turned into personal bio night, watch. >> when i was 5, my dad was the police chief of iowa. he was and still is a "law & order" guy. >> when i was just 16 years old, came to this country by myself. >> i grew up an in florida, the honest of seven children. >> laura: there are some interesting and inspirational bio points, but how did this turn into an episode of "this is your life," congressman? >> as i was sitting there, i thought they must focus group this thing, because everyone started with a biographical story, talk slowly, someone always was talking to a child or grandchild, some other kid.

they talked about their love of the constitution and this country. if they really got every box checked, they had a bible verse in there, as well. it was heavily scripted on the democrat side, there is no doubt about it. >> laura: you had to have the requisite, check the box of quoting "hamilton." most people haven't heard anything from hamilton since the play. one democrat from a swing district hearing from constituents -- actual voters -- on impeachment. >> just moments ago, if she is ready to vote for the april articles of impeachment. >> she says she is not there yet, but is hearing a lot from both sides from her district. >> the phones are ringing off the hook. we literally can't pick up the phone fast enough, and its people on both sides of it. >> laura: moderate democrat elissa slotkin, who says she is still undecided. matt schlapp, any chance these democrats are going to pull

themselves off the edge of the cliff here? >> what's interesting, we have 31 of these house democrats in district that trump won, some in districts that trump won overwhelmingly. and the polls coming in, including in all fairness, polls being released from the trump-penn's reelection campaign, show that independents, not republicans and democrats, no surprise where they stack up, but independents pushing against this idea of impeachment. some of these democrats should be happy the trump economy is so strong, because they vote for impeachment, they get a soft lining out in the private sector. >> laura: congressman biggs, one of your colleagues, hank johnson, democrat from georgia, he wants you and everyone else to believe that this is a constitutional emergency. if you don't act to impeach, you basically are taking a sledgehammer to the constitution. >> yeah, when the sign says, in case of emergency, break glass, there better be one heck of an

emergency. i did not call for impeachment before, but i call for impeachment today. because this is one heck of an emergency. >> laura: he is serious, congressman. >> yeah, no, he thinks it is a constitutional crisis. if it was, i would like to know why they took all of august off, a week off in september, two weeks in october, 11 days in november, when they should have been trying to remove the president, if it was really a constitutional crisis. it's not a constitutional crisis. what's a constitutional crisis is the abuse of power the democrats are foisting on this country, trying to remove this president and undo the election of 2016, which they've been trying to do since day one. >> laura: hey, matt, what i find interesting is the democrats have been turning themselves inside and out to try and produce this as an event. so they needed to bring in, i don't know, spielberg, they needed to bring in a real

director to really get this to be jazzed up, and an msnbc correspondent actually blamed the very technical nature of some of these, some of these issues, on why this might not be resonating. i kid you not to. watch it. >> you know, for republicans, they don't necessarily have to win the arguments in these public hearings, have to get people to turn off the television. if they can bog down this process, make it dense and not interesting to people who might otherwise care about the impeachment of a sitting president. >> laura: wait a second. i'm watching nunes and biggs, all these guys are really passionate, and the democrats are the ones boring us to death, matt. >> they're talking about themselves, as you said in the beginning of the segment. why are they talking about their own biographies? you know this, laura. you are a well-trained lawyer. they don't have the effect on their side. they don't have a good case. the reason americans started turning off the television and usually in congress you get both

sides, rather aggressively. because of the way schiff did things and nadler did things, and looked like the democrats were afraid to be exposed to the weakness of the case, and i think america smelled that from a mile away. spoon congressman bigs, matt schlapp, great to see you tonight. tell jordan he should be here. i answer more of your emails and tonight's "ingram inbox." there are some doozies beard i might have to delete some of them. is the future. the future of communicating of hearing and connecting with life. and this, is eargo. no appointments no waiting no hassles. and they are practically invisible in your ear. now you see it. now you don't. if you have hearing loss now is the time to do something about it. because denying you have hearing loss, well that's

the old way

>> laura: time again for "ingraham inbox." the first email is from thomas, writing to ask why there has been so little coverage of at&t's complicity in congressman shifts latest power grab. the company hasn't issued a press release or had public comments. it's a good question, when we will be pursuing in the coming days and weeks. they are not legally obligated

to turn over the phone records, that is my clear understanding. i do not believe there was a subpoena involved. the next is, no one is above the law, is that including immigrants who enter illegally? of course, it doesn't work with their narrative. send me your thoughts, and keep them short. that is all the time we have tonight. shannon bream and the "fox news @ night" team take it from here. shannon? >> shannon: learned something new every day. word of the day, laura. >> laura: had a great show. >> shannon: hello, welcome to "fox news @ night," shannon bream in new york. we begin with a fox news alert. the democrats impeachment push goes a prime time, judiciary committee debating the articles of impeachment against president trump just minutes ago, wrapping up. top republican on the committee, congressman doug collins, joins us live. the doj inspector general live on capitol hill with his findings, saying no one shoots consider themselves and vindicated if they were connected to this. his detailed