all discounted, which is good. i am a walmart shopper. it saves money. never miss an episode. let not your heart be troubled, laura ingraham is about to crush it, as usual. >> i thought of you because i slipped over briefly to see what the other side was doingin tonight, and your old front peter strzok was on tv talking about russia, russia, russia. >> is he still on that? deed did he talk about his insurance policy. did he talk about smelly trump voters? you know why i like walmart, you get everything in one spot and it's cheap. >> i thought, wait a second, is my tv stuck on 2017? what's going on with this tv! >> big news tomorrow, laura.

hannity sources tell hannity and you will hear tomorrow. >> laura: i love it. i'm laura ingraham and this is "the ingraham angle" from dc. tonight is mike bloomberg florida play for joe biden illegal? atop election is going to tell us why they pay up, in other words, so they can vote, could be against the law. could the supreme supreme court fight undermine the entire rationale behind joe biden's candidacy? how the left radical rhetoric already reveals that joe has no control. first, the dems abortion litmus test, that is the focus of t tonight's angle. we saw it coming for years, but with a possible supreme court nomination of the anti-christian and anti-catholic bigotry within

the democrat party is now undeniable. i'm going to see it even more starkly. joe biden, a roman catholic, is now presiding over a party that has an ugly vendetta against all people of strong traditional faith, democrats reveal their antipathy toward the faith background during her h confirmation hearing to the appellate court a few years ago. >> i think your article is very plain in your perspective about the role of religion. >> do you consider yourself an orthodox catholic? >> when you read your speeches, the conclusion one draws is that the dogma lives loudly within you. and that is of concern. >> you know, what is really ofs

concern is that the democrats would even sink this low. do they even know the history of their own party? during the 1960 presidential campaign many opposed the candidacy of jfk on the suspicion that his loyalty would be divided between the vatican on one side and the american people on the constitution on the other. in response, kennedy gave ati absolutely stirring defense of his candidacy in a religious liberty. >> if i should lose on the real issues, i shall return to my seat in the senate satisfied that i tried my best and was fairly judged. but if this election is decided on the basis of 40 million americans lost their chance of b being president on the day they were baptized, then it is the whole nation that will be the loser in the eyes of catholics

and non-catholics around the world, in the eyes of history. and in the eyes of her own people. >> laura: that was prophetic. spirit is everything they hate. she is a practicing roman catholic, a mother of seven children, a judicial and unfailingly respectful and courteous even when her critics are the opposite. since democrats have pegged their entire existence onpo preserving roe versus wade, they will die on that hill, they have shunned and expelled pretty much all pro-life members of their own party. if that means excluding from the ranks every christian, jew, and muslim, and the entire country who believes in traditional gender roles in protecting innocent life, then so be it. now they don't even pretend.

in november of 2019 latisha james, the rabbit pro- abortion new york attorney general said no more money from the attorney general association would go to pro-life democrats.n none of those ag candidates would get a penny. in fact, they had to publicly swear her to abortion rights to get money. what a far cry from the time when the democrat party stille cared about appealing to the country's religious voters. many of whom are pro-life. in 1993 president bill clinton stated his party's abortion views this way. >> an approach that seeks to protect the right to choose while reducing the number of abortions. our vision should be of america where abortion is safe and legal, but rare. >> rare? that is now totally out the window.ho congresswoman ocasio cortez and her marxist mavens may be

don't know that the constitution and article six expressly states that no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the united states. the left always -- are somehow outside the mainstream. if you believe in the political role of judges know their political views should be irrelevant. support for abortion on demand in america isn't overwhelming over all. the country is still bitterly divided on the issue, which is anotherhe reason it was better left up to the states. by the way, according to a gallup poll from may of 2020, 24 percent of democrats identify as pro-life. 41 percent of women say they are pro-life, and 43 percent of

nonwhite voters, are all they out the window for democrats as well. s at least 55 percent of americs say abortion should be illegal or allowed in only a few circumstances. but the democrats have really got themselves in a pickle here. because they are so invested in using the court as their way to advance a far left social agenda they can get ripped past the regular legislative process that they've alienated millions and millions and millions of moderate voters in rural and civilian suburban america likeke people represented in the gallup poll. democrats, they think you're really stupid, they think that you're going to forgive andat forget all of their efforts to cancel the faithful from public life. by the way, by using meaningless generalities about joe's faith

>> he is a profoundly decent me and guided by faith. >> he comes from a very devout catholic family. >> at the end of the day, i think he's a man of faith. that doesn't inoculate biden or any of them from being complicit in the antireligious search and destroy mission. they have moved so far left ond cultural issues, they are so wedded to roe, that they exclude and demonize people from their own church who hold traditional views on life, marriage, and human sexuality. all the while bragging about how they cherish diversity and inclusivity. those are total lies. yesterday newsweek published a story called

how charismatic how they inspired the handmaid's tale. now, that's like saying your church inspired the da vinci code, but it doesn't make the fiction true, no matter what group inspired it. this defamatory piece contradicts itself when it states that atwood was inspired by an entirely different group with no connection to those people of praise. despite having to issue this embarrassing correction. people of praise inspired the handmaid's trail, and new yorker profile of the author mentions a newspaper clipping of a different charismatic catholic group, people of hope.pe newsweek regrets the error. but this is how the left always operates. depict a benevolent charismatic faithful prayer group, which counts catholic bishops by the

way as members, just portray that as an evil cult, and then attempt to use it against a judge who has the audacity to believe in god. i fully expect the upcoming confirmation hearing full showcase democrat's supreme desireex to excommunicate the faithful from serving in any prominent capacity in government . their actions will once again demonstrate how fundamentally they misconstrued the constitution, their proper and consent role and the function of nine justices who sit on the court itself. >> while this year it may be a catholic against the finger of suspension is pointed, and other years it has been and may someday be again a jew or a quaker or unitarian or a baptist. it was the harassment a of baptist preachers for example that led

to jefferson's statute about religious freedom. for today i made the be the victim, but tomorrow it may be you. until the whole fabric of our harmonious society is ripped apart at a time of great national peril. >> that's where the democrats have taken america, to a place of great national peril. and that's the angle. joining me now is american serve dave union chair and chris hawn, former aide to senator jack schumer. matt, let's start with you. it does seem that anti-catholic bigotry is the last acceptable prejudice in america. l >> that's right, just look at kamala harris with her treatment of president trump's judicial nominees. on several occasions it's these

male nominees who are members of this really radical group called the knights of columbus, she considered that to be too extreme. now you have the questions and all this about weather judge barrett should not be considered for the supreme court because of her religion. as the angle says, the constitution is clear, there can be no religious test consistent with the law. second of all, the federal statute says that you cannot discriminate people based on religious faith, but that is exactly what the democrats are building a case to do, discriminate against a woman jurist simply because she is a person of faith. it's un-american. i don't think it will be politically acceptable. >> i was watching that the obviously famous speech by jfk during the campaign of 1960, and it really struck a nerve with me deep inside. arriving at a place for great natural peril. and i want to get to what matt mentioned there.

senator harris's smear campaign against another nominee. it was here's who raised concerns about the knights of columbus.is it's an all-male society and asked if was aware that the knights opposed a woman's right to choose and work against marriage equality when joined. it's not too absurd to see that these attacks are happening again. >> nobody is attacking her for being a catholic. i went to the catholic law school, i was born catholic, i'm going to my godson confirmation next week, and i'm voting for catholic for president of the united states, joe biden, but let me explain something, we have the right in this country to impose our religious beliefs

on other people. it is perfectly legitimate to question an appointee about their position on things that can affect millions of americans . soso i expect a vigorous debate especially given the climate that mitch mcconnell has created for judicial nominees, but i believe that her catholicism is not the issue. i think that is way over the to and out of line. >> the handmaid's tale? they had that up on newsweek. that was blasted everywhere. it is a cultural insult, and no one -- where are the democrats standing up for religious liberty? where are they?

>> let's be clear of who owns newsweek. >> where are the democrats? a roman catholic democrats. where are the roman catholic democrats standing up for d religious liberty in the same vein that rfk with 122 kids, he would probably be looked down upon by this crew up there on capitol hill who seem to look down on people with big families as some sort of freak of nature. i'm sorry, but that's where this is going. i think the democrats know exactly what they're doing with this little handmaids trigger >> as chris just said, the problem is, if they belong to a group that is antiabortion. chris, i love you, my friend, but the catholic church is a group that is antiabortion. if you can block a judge or justice from belonging to a group, that means a catholic who

is consistent with their faith need not apply, that is a religious test, that is unconstitutional. it's unfair, for joe biden who has a group, this is their moment. if somebody of faith gets picked, and they allow these smears to go forward without -- joe biden should this very day say that. >> i'm sorry. i'm sorry. >> i don't think we'd be a member of that party. >> matt, nobody is questioningar her on her religion. you are absolutely allowed to -- >> on how they feel about a particular issue. >> everyone is losing. we want people to understand specifically what we're talking about here. here was democrat dick durban

during the barrett 2017yo appellate court confirmation hearing. watch. >> i can't tell you how many nominees have been forced on this panel for bench and also virtually all stay the same. i'm following the president, i'm following the law, i'm following the constitution. don't worry a thing about who i am. what my life experiences have been. put it all aside. i don't believe that for a second.er >> in order to be a catholic in good standing to be on the court, you have to be a catholic that is pro-choice, that i believes in the changes to traditional gender roles, or you're immediately suspicious, because that's what it sounds like to me. >> most american catholics are pro-choice, they don't follow the teachings of the church religiously. they probably should, but they don't. so i am not of the belief that your is a judgment, it is what you have done, what you

have advocated in your life. >> what did she advocate? >> all of those things were fair game. >> again, my question to chris and he's not answering it and i think this speaks volumes. what did amy coney barrett advocate except her belief in her faith, which i understood from the sixth amendment of the constitution, could not be something that we took into account for federal appointment. what did she do? >> i haven't done a full review but we will have one over the next 45 days if she is nominated. i can be sure of it and i'll be able to come back and tell you. >> a little homework. >> a little homework. she is a member of the roman catholic church. >> want to put some money on that? i've got to go. i gotta go. thank you so much.

mike bloomberg, as we saidu earlier, a big announcement from him. he's going to be sending millions of millions of dollars to try to turn out a very important constituency for democrats, former felons. is it legal? election lawyer and u.s. civil rights commissioner says no, he will explain why. it is fascinating. in moments. will explain why

>> taken by this election. i have news for mr. bloomberg, and that is the american people are sick and tired of billionaires buying elections. >> he can't hide behind the airways. he has to answer questions. >> $60 billion can buy you a lot of advertising, but it can't arrange a record. >> those same democrats seem perfectly fine with what looks line effort by mike bloomberg to actually buy votes. the former new york city mayor raised $16 million to pay the fines and court fees of 32,000 former felons. what do they have to do? the 32,000 ex-cons he is bailing out are all black and hispanic

and a memo from bloomberg's steam lays out what's really going on. the data shows in black voters are a unique universe where the democratic support rate tends to be 90-95 percent. joining me now is christian adams on the u.s. commission on civil rights. great to see you tonight. you say i believe that this could be breaking existing federal law. explain it for the layman. >> laura, i understand it looks like a very nice thing to do fo> these people to get the restitution paid for and for the victims of the crimes to get any money finally after waiting for it. it might be breaking federal law. federal law makes it a crime to pay for or offer to pay for

money for voting. that is a crime under federal law. he might be putting these people right back in jeopardy of federal prosecution. >> is there tax implications here? that is basically giving people money in order to affect their vote. what about the tax implication on this question? i'm going back to my law school days. it's basically income to pay of a debt. do you have to pay taxes on that ? >> yes. if somebody came and paid off your mortgage or paid off your car loan and just paid for all that would be a thing of value that you receive, just likeof bloomberg has promised to pay off the debt for these individuals that have to pay restitution. that is a thing of value.

he would also trading tax liabilityl in addition to jeopardize her criminal freedomt they're trying to restore the rights and now he's going it appeared. >> christian, it's a federal law.ic now tax implication here is what florida law says about buying votes. no person should give or promise anything of value to another to buy the persons or another person's vote or to influence that person and another cast of his or her vote. third-degree felony there, could bloomberg be in violation of that? >> it references indirectly. so if you give somebody something of value, which is mainly pay their debts, the rea question is whether or not you are buying their boat in exchange for that. i think that's what bloomberg said he's doing, isn't it? it really is a real unfortunate situation. you thought you'd seen everything until this year, the avalanche of money affecting this election is just

astonishing. >> mentioning the racial angle, i'm trying to think of a third problem for bloomberg here as a civil matter perhaps. with the racial implication of this and giving a benefit based on its more opaque, but fascinating. the gop is challenging a recent court ruling. for republicans are asking the us supreme court to overturn a state high court order that mai in that ballots received days after the election must be counted. but that is just one of several recent rulings out of swing states threatening the integrity of the november 3rd election. here to break it all down is former acting u.s. attorney general george terwilliger. courts in wisconsin and michigan have also extended the deadline for mail-in ballots, and a lot of republicans are very worried

that these votes will be miraculously found regardless of how much trump might win state by, they'll always find just enough in the mailings the week, two weeks later to make up the difference. is that a concern? >> the integrity of the election process is very valid concern. for a number of reasons. it is one person, one vote. when somebody fakes a vote or gets a vote twice, it dilutes every legitimate voter's vote. that is a civil right to have your vote counted on the basis of the one person one vote standard. even of more concern right now at least to me, is that judges are already getting into the act with changing these kind of election rules.

the constitution is very clear. the legislatures of states -- for the electoral college or to be selected. while all states use the popula vote, it is the legislature tha lays out the rules for ornducting that popular vote election. with judges already stepping in and changing those rules when elections are already underway there are a number of laws including federal laws that are implicated. those laws have been cited in at least in the pennsylvania case that we are already asking the supreme court to step in and take a look. >> would this have to be expedited on the federal level? >> in order to be meaningful. if it's going to be meaningful, it would have to be expedited because we are now 43 days from the election.. >> laura: this is what pennsylvania election law says

about mail-in ballot deadlineep and it's except as provided under this section, must be received in that office of the county board of elections no later than 8:00 p.m. on the day of the primary election. how could the court interpret that to mean ballots can arrive days or even in some cases weeks later? what does that do to what election day even means? >> that is just a great question, what does it do to what election day really means? apart from the legal problems this is a practical problem. election officials, and i trust that many, and it's not most election officials in the cities and towns want to report them in a timely look away way as their legislature has directed. 1 quart start stepping in and

changing the rules, it makes their jobs impossible. >> how confident are you that this would be successful federal challenge?ce given what is at stake in this election. >> it is more that's what's at stake in this election, this is truly the only national election we have, and after the contest in the 19th century, congress set out some very hard fast rules for how those kinds of, the electoral college should be administered and the process for determining them, so there is very much at question here. >> we are just six weeks out from election day. do you know the state of the race now, and did you know that there is a senate race that could actually threaten to upend the entire supreme court confirmation process.

we are here in moments to tell you everything you need to know.

>> tonight we take a look at state of the race, exactly six weeks out. just how much is still up in the air? real clear politics protects a staggering 191 electoral votes as tossups. while joe biden once again woke up and called media lid first thing on monday morning. today president trump was once again crisscrossing the nation. tonight he found himself in pennsylvania where he had this to say about the race. >> this election is a choice between pennsylvania and china. if biden wins, china wins, when we win, pennsylvania wins and america wins. >> pennsylvania is a really important state, perhaps the most important in the entire race. why is that?mo if trump takes, pennsylvania,

he can still afford to lose wisconsin and michigan from his 2016 map and still go on to win. joining now is john bevan cofounder and trump 2020 campaign poster. john , can't believe it, but 42 days to go. what are the state combinations the trump team is now looking at. >> again, you are pointing out quitting at 12:00 o'clock because the teleprompter is hard to move out andd keep up with the president but when he does go out, you can tell he's following the president precisely to the states of pennsylvania, michigan, and wisconsin coming he even use the teleprompter to go to florida, and give to speeches, so when you're looking at the polls, and the polls are coming out every day, polls that look good for the president

whether it's, north carolina within the last 24 hours, iowa or georgia, joe biden has a lot of ground to cover with that teleprompter. >> thinks the entire thing could hinge on pennsylvania, saying g our model gives the president i just lost it on the screen, but what about that? hinge on pennsylvania, they give a 94 percent chance of winning what about that when you look at the state of the race. >> if you look at that the 2016 map, donald trump goodsul lose - if he holds onto florida and north carolina and wins pennsylvania, he cut these michigan. hean could lose wisconsin and e arizona. and if he hangs on second district, it will be a 269-269

tied, but i think pennsylvania is key. right now it's the only one of the battleground states where joe biden is performing worse at this point then hillary clinton was four years ago. >> but he is hopping over there a lot. it is short treck from delaware it's not too far. and it is a short trip. i'm sorry, but you see trump's schedule, every night he is out with the people. i call him the energizer bunny because he's out and about, because biden is having some virtual events, you have the circles and everyone's in the circle, but if you're just judging it on kind of vigorous connection to the material, i mean in my mind, it looks like trump's to lose. >> we don't think anythingng for granted, and as you mentioned

we want to win all those states. the president is working very hard to win although states. we proved tonight we have a big debate coming up, so i don't know whether biden is resting up for that or if he's got to figure out how to get the teleprompter to work during the debate. but he's going places were no president has ever been before. parts of the country he's going to the parts of these states where people will appreciate their president is going there and fighting for them in making sure he's going to be there for their jobs for their healthcare and to keep their taxes low, so president trump i think is absolutely running laps around the biden teleprompter right now. >> tom, this was a strategy that seemed to work for him when itim looked like people were just going to be completely freaked out moment by moment from covid

and now a lot of the country is moving on. they know there's a risk, but they have to feel like they have to go on with their lives, kids have to go back to school, to go back to smart and common sense living. i'm not sure that strategy is hanging back and kamala isn't doing that much either. it's a risky strategy. >> i agree with that. we are definitely seeing two different campaigns in terms of the travel and all of that. we have seen right now, the public obviously, the narrative has shifted just in the last 72 hours to the supreme court, and i would also add going back to pennsylvania, it's the only -- it's the state on the list of battlegrounds that has the biggest population of capitals. and if in fact donald trump becomes the as they did in the previous confirmation hearings it's going to be interesting to see how that plays out particularly in pennsylvania. >> pennsylvania, wisconsin,

michigan, has an enormous catholic face. the president has struggled among some catholic voters, and a lot of people believe that attacks on her faith or even opaque attacks on her face are going to give a boost to donald trump. great to see you tonight. thank you so much. has the fight over rbg's seat already entirely overridden biden's we explain it all in moments.

..

>> biden's presidential run is dedicated out of decency and a return to normalcy. with the rancorous revealing th battle lines is biden's rationale for running being totally obliterated. we can smear a supreme court nominee were before she's been nominated. can you promise a return to normal if your parties thought leaders are upending constitutional norms and with a obvious power grab? voters have a front row seat to what many of us have said early on.

biden's campaign is nothing mor than an so take the issue of court packing. it was a nonstarter for biden during the primary grades. >> i would not get into court packing, we have three justices the next time around we lose control, they had three justices . you would lose the credibility of the court has at all. >> now he refuses too in to the question. >> it's a legitimate question, but this is why i'm not answering the question. because it shifts all the focus. let's say i answer that question , then the whole debate is going to be well biden said or didn't say. biden said he would or wouldn't. >> why is he wearing a mask of air? i'm not following that. this fight is good for many reasons, but chief among them i the fact that it clarifies that

biden has absolutely zero control over the radicals in hi own party. >> that is very true. he has been promising a return to normalcy. we have to ask who has been responsible for all of the abnormality of the past few years. which side has been unleashing paramilitary gangs on the stree to harass people on the side box . which people been deploying the deep state of government agains political opponents. the answer is it's the left, it's the democrats. now he's threatening to pack th courts? there is nothing in the constitution that says the cour must have nine justices. one could have a decent argumen should the court have 50 justices, and that would of course diminish the power of an given president republican or democrat to influence a court, but that's not what the democrats are talking about. they just won't want an expansion of the number of justices, they want to stack th

court and that's a completely different matter that involves destroying the independence of the judiciary and biden is at least considering it. >> they are trying to out radicalize each other when they comment on what should happen next if trump pushes forward with this nomination before the election. it is to people from the previous campaign, obama's team and a far left cultural figure. watch. >> we want democrats to pull ou all the stops to boycott the hearings, not take meetings wit the nominees. >> democrats can stack the cour and they can do that amendment and get it passed. >> we will have to blow up the entire system. >> they should have a list of things on healthcare, on climate , on voting rights, and need to do them all. grab the power and then fully utilize it. >> he looks like a mad professo there. why is america samoa left out o

the whole statehood discussion. the u.s. virgin islands, they should become a state. can get the democrats for a lon time have counted on the republicans to be the party of the nice guys. the democrats basically assume that we will never do to them what they do to us. they could knock down our monuments and we will never knocked on their monuments. they can stack the court, we want stack record. i think the answer to this is w have to learn to call them on their bluff, if they want to pu forward a court stacking plan and we win the house next time, maybe we should adopt their pla and in the spirit of bipartisanship, stacked the court ourselves for it. >> it's not just the far left figures, it is global celebrity former democrat president at th john lewis funeral who made an outrageous projection and desir unknown to all. >> if all this takes illuminating the filibuster,

another jim crow relic, in orde to secure them that is what we should do. >> he has a whole lilt to his voice. >> he always has to go back to racial angle when you're trying to push something through like that. >> this is an embarrassment. people talk about obama as a constitutional law professor, but he's never published a scholarly article on any subjec in his life. the other thing is we saw that cavanaugh hearings when they trotted out one accusation afte another. you notice at the end of it, when he was all the accusations evaporated bread. >> we have to go. sorry to get don't forget your lunch! i'm making pizza on king's hawaiian mini subs. yum! king's hawaiian.

>> the detroit youth choir. you are phenomenal, and i'm so honored to see you in person, i watched you on tv.

i am so proud of you guys. >> she touched her mask three times, that's why the masks are difficult by the way, more importantly, happy birthday to our executive producer, he is one of the best and he is 24 today. shannon bream and the fox news at night team take it from here. >> he's a good guy, but he's no 24. happy birthday, tommy. shannon: a good guy but he's not 24. happy birthday, tommy. thanks. tonight, why won't joe biden answer questions about court packing and who he would nominate to fill the seat opened by the passing of ruth bader ginsburg. we are examining the strategy.