>> sean: unfortunately that's all the time we have left this evening, as always we thank you for being with us, thank you for making the show possible. set your dvr so you never miss an episode of "hannity." the news will continue, you can always go to foxnews.com. let not your heart be troubled, she is standing by. laura ingraham, "the ingraham angle" -- what's the angle tonight? >> laura: i have a question for you. >> sean: that's always a bad thing. >> laura: do you know how to set your own dvr? of someone said i want you to series record -- >> sean: yes. you go to settings on your tv. you click on the dvr, you click on the dvr part, you hit record and then it will ask you once only or it will ask every episode of. >> laura: you have people who do that for you, correct? >> sean: i don't! >> laura: you don't know how to do that, you have no idea. >> sean: you take the clicker,

you see this right here? >> laura: you have no idea how to do it, you're making it up as a go along. >> sean: then you hit record and it will ask you a question, one time only or every episode? every episode of "the ingraham angle" on the dvr. >> laura: i hear your producers laughing in the background. >> sean: they are laughing because it's easy! >> laura: they are laughing at you and me because we are hilarious. we love you, see you tomorrow. this is "the ingraham angle" from washington tonight. rights for all, that's the focus of tonight's angle. it wasn't until about 1992 when i began my clerkship for justice clarence thomas that i began to pay attention to how the media writes about the supreme court. i'm talking about "the new york times" and "the washington post," "time" magazine, "newsweek," television reporters, 90% of them believe the court rulings were radical and outside the mainstream

unless those rulings affirmed whatever "the new york times" and harvard law school believed what the right outcomes. from the death penalty to abortion to criminal justice matters, liberal journalists and politicos insisted that the supreme court to act as rubber-stamp for their views. in cases where justice is merely applied the facts of the case of the law might forget it -- of course, that's not the proper understanding of the court's role. the court properly understood is a check on the legislative and executive branches and on the states where constitutional issues are involved. when the court today issued a 6-3 ruling striking down new york's very restrictive concealed carry law, the reaction from the press and the assorted democrats, it was textbook. speak of the supreme court decision is going to call into question every piece of gun restriction across the country. what the conservatives on the supreme court are saying is we

want the second amendment to be a first class the first amendment. and we want to be able to carry guns anywhere, anytime, without any sort of regulation by the government. >> so many people get hit by these guns when you read the news headlines every day children crossing the street, people are doing nothing because everyone decided to be a good guy with a gun. >> here in times square amidst all the hubbub and reaction and potential of gangs at the so forth, people can easily carry around concealed weapons -- that's disturbing. we have a supreme court that is out of touch with modern day realities. >> laura: david gergen, wrong, wrong and -- wait -- wrong. justice thomas interpreted the second amendment in the only way that makes sense. right in the constitutional rights to bear arms in public for self-defense is not a second-class right subject to an

entire different body of rules than the other bill of rights guarantees, we know of no other constitutional right that an individual may exercise only after demonstrating to government officers some special need. that's not how the first amendment works, not have a sixth amendment works, not have a second amendment works when it comes to the public carry for self-defense. new york's proper clause violates the 14th amendment in that it prevents the law abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and bear arms. of course as usual, my old bosses 100% correct. every other right in the bill of rights is to limit the government's power, to restrict it. the ten amendments were written by the framers to protect us from a corrupt oppressive government. of course the founders knew what it was like to live under

tyranny and therefore the people's rights to bear arms to them was key to maintaining a free country. makes sense. of course left-wingers and the government across the united states, they despise the constitution. they are enraged over this ruling. >> this decision isn't just reckless, it's reprehensible. the insanity of the gun culture that is now possessed everyone all the way up to the supreme court. >> we cannot allow new york to become the wild west. we will not allow cities to live in fear that everyone around us is armed and that any altercation could evolve into a shoot-out. >> it's devastating, it's fundamentally devastating. it's a challenge of our time and we've got to rise up as a country.

>> laura: because your streets are so safe, right? every day these people betrayed their own rule of law whether it's lori lightfoot or kathy hogle or adams, they are content to leave their own law-abiding citizens defenseless and make the job of law enforcement at the same time more difficult pretty much at every turn. for the regular person out there the workaday person, it's a lose-lose proposition. the elites always protect each other. celebrities and other special people were the only ones new york believed to have meaningful second amendment right to carry a concealed weapon. back in 2010 a list of new york city concealed carry permit holders was obtained by the "new york daily news." people like mark anthony, robert de niro, donald trump, his son donald, jr., mets third baseman david wright and even martha stewart's daughter all were authorized to carry a

weapon concealed in the city. john skyler chambers a lawyer who helped a lot of new yorkers get these gun permits for more than two decades now said that they can get their own security but with the internet is much easier to find people. they don't want to find someone on their lawn at 5:00 in the morning -- okay. i'm just at that comment we see the absurdity in this new york law. democrats as usual catered to the elites. because they are the only ones who have a legitimate concern about an intruder showing up at their homes or threatening them in public. another reason you know this 6-3 court was right is by the silliness of the dissent. in it, justice breyer -- of course he is retiring trash rather than addressing the plain language that informs the word the second of amendment, he

discussed gun suicide and listed the well-known mass shootings in america like uvalde, buffalo, orlando, dayton, he talked about the horrors of that. justice alito who was in the majority wrote separately in a concurrence, he slapped back at justice breyer saying why does the dissent think it's relevant to recount the mass shootings that have occurred in recent years? does the dissent think laws like new york's prevent or deter such atrocities? if he knows it's illegal to carry a handgun outside a home? how does the senate account for the fact that one of the mass shootings near the top of this list took place in buffalo -- the new york law and issued in this case did not stop that perpetrator. i don't know, that's a heck of a retirement send-off for stephen breyer. another obvious reason that you know the court got it right, reactions from some of the most

unhinged personalities out there. like former sports guy keith olbermann who tweeted the ruling shows the court should be dissolved and advises states ignore the ruling. that is a neat trick -- just ignore the court. remember, these are the same people who are constantly warning about how under republicans, democracy is at risk, democracy is in peril. call me crazy, i think he should stick to memorabilia collecting because he's actually really good at that. this is how it always works with these people, when they don't get their way they want to tear down the entire system. in other words abolish the electoral college, bern city blocks, tear down statues statues and pack the court. forget packing the court, just dissolve it all together, that's where we've come.

this is sheer lunacy. its anti-constitutional, it's anti-american. in the end, this is not a radical decision, it's not a crazy decision. it's a long overdue decision. contrary to all the caterwauling out there on the left, the really doesn't even mean states have no power to regulate guns. it just can't prohibit law-abiding residents from carrying a gun for self-defense as justice alito noted, that's all we decide. our holding decides nothing about who a lawfully possessing a firearm or the requirement that must be met to buy a gun, nor does it decide anything about the kind of weapons that people may possess, nor have we disturbed anything we said in heller or mcdonald versus chicago about restrictions that may be imposed on the possession or carrying of guns. get it? the modern american left don't

like you, they despise you, you have to understand this. they do not want the regular, ordinary people to be free to defend themselves and their family. why? why don't they want that? because they want you dependent, they want you scared, they want you groveling for whatever scraps they decide to throw at you. they would abolish the second amendment in a heartbeat if they could to. frankly the entire constitution for that matter. thankfully our founders were very wise. they saw how power corrupted otherwise sensible men and how important it was to leave behind a document that would protect all the people, not just the upper crust against the abusers. thankfully we had six justices on the court who honored the plain language of the text and the intent of the framers. that's the angle.

back in july 2014 a federal judge declared d.c.'s ban on carrying handguns in public unconstitutional. since then thousands have obtained a concealed carry permit after taking hours of trading from a certified firearms instructor. the very first person to become one of those instructors was also the first one to get a concealed carry permit in the district of columbia. i happen to know him, his name is leon spears and he joins me now. i think you were the first person to call me -- i think it was within a half-hour after this ruling came down. what do people need to know about what this means and why this is good news for the average person out there who is scared in the streets of urban america? >> nice to see you as always. first off there are four points.

the first point is obviously the constitution was upheld today, so you have a right to carry a firearm outside of your home. heller decided you can keep a firearm inside your home for self-defense. this is considered groundbreaking because you can defend yourself outside your home. the second thing is once you are able to carry outside your home, how are you carrying? are you carrying openly or concealed? if you are allowed by the states provision to carry concealed, then it goes to step three. how can you carry concealed? either restrictions so you can have restrictions on training, how long the training is, you can have magazine capacities, you can have fingerprints, photos, background checks, those are the requirements.

you can have sensitive places. schools, fully owned and operated by the government structures, day cares, hospitals, you can have limitations for sensitive places. again, then you can go to reciprocity and recognition. let's say you're allowed to carry but then sure enough what does that state say? do they recognize another state concealed carry permit? or better yet is there reciprocity agreement amongst attorney general's or governments that allow each other to conceal in each other's jurisdictions? many people don't understand today was a great day for gun ownership and empowerment for people to be able to defend themselves. >> laura: i want to play something from msnbc's michelle >> talking to people who are advocates for new gun laws and gun restrictions this is

devastating for them, they feel like this is good to make america less safe. people think and blue states they are some ways protected by that but if you live in new york or california that you somehow will not have to deal with this sort of conservative thing you see happening in other states. >> laura: you are less safe because of this, does that make any sense given your extensive background in firearms training to help people get these concealed carry permits? >> it's empowering to teach people in d.c. about the ability to carry a firearm. i don't know how many people are my clients that are empowered that's number one they have the ability to carry and defend themselves and their families. they want to be law-abiding and the criminals are choosing every day not to go by the strenuous process of buying a gun, getting trained, getting background

checks, getting government approval. the bad guys aren't doing that. people just want to be able to defend themselves to the best of their ability and that is what the supreme court said today. >> laura: everyone has to understand that to get these concealed carry permits, nothing of the court said today diminishes all of the requirements set by various jurisdictions. all it says is once you have all that, you can't be denied arbitrarily the right to carry concealed. none of these people have read the decision, none of the people know anything about the law but they are doing the histrionic thing to try to scare people for political reasons. you made it so clear for us, thank you so much and it's great to see you tonight. while blue state governors respond to today's supreme court ruling, productively come down the side of the whole elites over the citizens thing, many still think there could be

viable options to leave the country should joe biden choose not to run in 2024. politico is out with a new piece today about the democratic governors positioning themselves for potential run, are you ready? the names include power-hungry failures. phil murphy of new jersey. the final report on covid weighing all the health outcomes in new jersey, found that his state finished last. then on the list is j.b. pritzker of illinois. he has a big appetite for destruction because last year's state law 122,000 residents the largest the client in state history. then there is gretchen witless witmer of michigan. her own state legislature had to fight to end her emergency powers after she refused to relinquish them and the state legislature won.

finally, who could forget golden state golden boy gavin newsom. his governorship is going so well that residents are fleeing california's high taxes and unaffordable housing and running away to places like mexico -- i kid you not to. donnée me now is ari fleischer, author of the new book suppression, deception, snobbery, and bias. i have to say if this is all they got, republicans have to feel pretty good tonight. j.b. pritzker? what? >> it's been a long time since democrats reached down to the ranks of governors for a candidate to. you have to go back to 1996, bill clinton was the last governor who became a democratic nominee. they like senators in 2,000, 2004, 2008, 2012, they all nominated senators or former

senators. let me remind you in the 2019-2020 cycle, 28 democrats ran for president. four of them were governors or former governors. when joe biden announces he's not running which he will do after the midterm election and into early 2023, it will be a donnybrook, a free-for-all, governors, senators, and dog catchers one and all. >> they are already getting ready, the democrats and the media are all setting upon joe biden for his age and lack of mental acuity. it's not a secret anymore, everybody is kind of talking about it. in illinois, i want to focus on j.b. pritzker for a moment to. you these major companies that are deciding to leave illinois because of the high tax, high regulation dangerous crime in the city of chicago, obviously.

we have ken griffin's company leaving illinois, that was huge loss that she's going to miami. we have caterpillar leaving, boeing leaving. these are blue-chip companies saying we would like to stay, we love illinois but under this leadership, we are out. how does j.b. pritzker get on that list? total loser. >> that is going to be a problem for every one of these democratic governors, those states are all losing populations mostly to red states for the logical reasons you just cited. quality-of-life issues, crime issues, economic issues, i'm in chicago right now and it's interesting to note the major businesses that are getting out of here and they are doing it because they are fed up, they are doing it because the state has one answer to everything, raise taxes and make life more difficult to. now they are voting with their corporate headquarters come up with a people start to see it and will it change reactions in the states? i don't know about that because

the majorities are so hugely democratic in california, illinois, and new york. but it does make it hard to be a governor and become a president. >> laura: they're going to lose hundreds of millions of dollars in tax revenue and these companies which they already said they are leading, the numbers are so bad for biden. every time you come on we say he has reached a new low, he reached another new low today. 33% in one poll, 36% in another among suburban voters, he has an approval of 37% among nonwhite 43% approve, 49% disapprove. is not getting any better the more they put joe biden out the worse he seems to do, final thoughts. >> he's about to turn 80 years old and it shows. every time he's seen walking, he loses a vote. people look at him and they go he doesn't have what it takes, the stamina, energy, strength it

takes to be president, this is adding up and it's why the democrats are in trouble. >> good to see you. joe biden smears thousands of mom and pop gas station owners across the country yesterday when he claimed that they can lower their gas prices on their own. one of them is here next to tell us why he's wrong. plus why did bill gates try to push a huge tract of land in north dakota without anyone finding out? that mystery revealed in moments a multivitamin alone, you may be missing a critical piece. preservision. preservision areds 2 contains the only clinically proven nutrient formula recommended by the national eye institute to help reduce the risk of moderate to advanced amd progression. "preservision is backed by 20 years of clinical studies" "and its from the eye experts at bausch and lomb" so, ask your doctor about adding preservision. and fill in a missing piece of your plan. like i did with preservision"

♪ ♪ how's he still playin'? aspercreme arthritis. full prescription-strength. reduces inflammation. don't touch my piano. kick pain in the aspercreme.

>> the company's running gas stations and a setting those prices at the pump, this is a time of war, global peril, ukraine, these are not normal times. bring down the price you are charging at the pump to reflect the cost you are paying, do it now. do it today. your customers, the american people, they need relief now. >> laura: i can't believe that is the president of the united states. that was biden yesterday smearing mom-and-pop gas station owners as greedy, blaming them for being responsible for keeping prices high at the pump, what is the truth here? we decided to go right to the

source. joining me now is lonnie mcwhorter owner of 36 to refuel station in minneapolis, i know where you are, i know minneapolis really welcome i'll be there in a couple of weeks. to operators like you control the prices as the president indicated? >> that's a great question, thanks for having me back. small operators control very little in the overall cost of fuel on the retail end of things. it's upsetting and really reprehensible what our president, the statement he made yesterday regarding our industry and i can tell you it hurts a bit as well as the under hundred 48,000, many of which are working tonight inside our store. >> laura: also operating on a very narrow margin of profit i understand, friends who own various service stations across the country. a lot of them say we make a lot of our money on snacks and other

supplies that are sold in our gas stations, so people are spending a lot of money on gas, they actually aren't spending on the other items on which the service station owners make more of a prophet, is that accurate from your perspective? >> that is correct and that's a great point you brought up, i would also like to bring up the cash flow situation as well. we small operators have credit lines that you get out pretty quickly when gas escalates as quickly as it has. we have more money stuck in the ground for inventory, less available for investing inside our stores and maintaining standards we would like to keep it that. >> when you think about the fact we have 400 years supply of oil and gas in the united states, 400 years, where the united states can be independent and free of foreign dependence and so forth, what does that make you come how does that make you feel?

>> it is a challenging dynamic a number of individuals ready to work and get projects done that can continue and allow us to be energy independent and work hard on the policy end of things. i'm out in d.c. at the moment talking about that sole issue about how do we keep costs lower for the consumer, coming out of our stores each day, convenience stores -- 156 millions individuals per day which equates to about half of america coming into our doors and we are doing our best to support the communities that we serve. >> laura: people have to understand these are mom-and-pop stores and entrepreneurs who want to make a better life for themselves and help their communities and your essential, thank you for the perspective and understanding tonight. another laura ingraham exclusive, north the codes were up in arms this week when a road trust purchased 2,100 acres of

farmland 50 miles from the canadian border. they were even more incensed when the state attorney general got to the bottom of who was behind this. bill gates, the man who was pushing for the u.s. to move 100% of artificial beef purchased the land under something called red river trust. it breaks no north dakota laws, gates has proven it's not in violation of corporate farming laws. joining me now, doug goering. how were your constituents reacting to their possible new neighbor and why the secrecy of the eventual ownership here? >> hard to say why. i would say it's land transactions, generally not that

public. somebody caught this one. maybe somebody was going through files and when it was being filed it sparks an interest. it sparked a lot of comments from the community from those across the state, landowners, farmers, ranchers. it's not like mr. gates has necessarily embraced the values of our community of our state of rural america and especially with the fact that his attack on meat protein, his persistent attack on co2 and being defined as toxic gas and climate change. his positions on population control, it's got a lot of people up in arms. >> laura: the attacks on meat in and of itself are

completely -- run counter to the north dakota and agricultural interest that i know. dependent upon various meats, chicken, beef, et cetera to make a living and to provide services and products that people want. mr. commissioner, we are showing land owned by bill gates throughout the united states in a graphic here. at adds up to almost 270,000 acres. it's a lot of land. do you think he gets the agriculture here? what's going on? >> i'm not sure if it's a matter of some people that just look for a way to have a stable investment. if you purchase land, chances are it's not going to devalue much. who knows how quickly it will appreciate. the problem that many have run

into in the state of north dakota especially in that area is what the land sold for, they probably could've baltimore at public auction, there were many that had said land appears sold for more than that just a while ago. why this sale, why did they seek them out, why did they want to make this deal? i can't answer that, i can only just convey the sentiments of the people in north dakota who are frustrated, irritated and they feel like they are exploited by the ultrarich. >> they have the bucks to pay for it. we are going to stay on this but we appreciate your perspective tonight, thank you. yet another exclusive, a new book how general jim mattis through his own marines under the bus 15 years ago in afghanistan. one of those marines is here to tell us what the story was, what really happened -- stay there.

go with simparica trio it's triple protection made simple!

simparica trio is the first and only monthly chewable that covers heartworm disease, ticks and fleas, round and hookworms. dogs get triple protection in just one simparica trio! this drug class has been associated with neurologic adverse reactions, including seizures. use with caution in dogs with a history of these disorders. protect him with all your heart. simparica trio.

these days it seems like everything is vying for your attention. there are tons of trending dances to discover on social media, billions of shows to binge watch, and not to mention a talking owl on your tv. oh, and there's even this- the easiest way to book an exam at america's best. are you even listening to me? nope, you're trying to scan this code. i would be too if i had a phone... and opposable thumbs. get a free, quality eye exam when you buy two pairs for $79.95. scan the code or book online at americasbest.com

>> laura: general james mad dog mattis, remember him? he won universal praise for his military service and his dedication to country. his commitment to some of the men and women he led in battle especially the marines that served under him in afghanistan is now being called into question. we have new details from our west coast newsroom. >> back in 2,007 an elite group of u.s. marines were falsely accused of massacring civilians after they defeated and ambushed by taliban fighters in afghanistan, those marines say general james mattis completely threw them under the bus. take a look at these images, these are from that attack back in march of 2007. the marines were in a six vehicle convoy when they were attacked by a suicide bomber driving a van and taliban fighters on both sides of the road who opened fire on them. after the marines repelled the

ambush, images immediately began circulating showing bullet totaled vehicles and ambulances carrying away bloodied afghan men. false witness accounts began to feel worldwide headlines accusing the marines of slaughtering civilians. the marines were expelled from afghanistan within five days and they say they are due process went completely out the window. retired marine major fred galvin was in that ambush and he said general mattis unleashed five criminal investigators and four prosecuting attorneys against the marines that were falsely accused of, essentially, mass murder. they say he enacted a gag order him to go marine officers who he named as codefendants and what ended up being the longest war crimes trial in marine corps history. after 12 years major galvin and the other accused marines were finally cleared of any and all wrongdoing. they had their permanent records wiped clean. they claim to the military destroyed their reputation and

tried to imprison them. major galvin says these previous comments in 2005 paint him as a total hypocrite. >> it's a lot of fun to fight them -- it's fun to shoot some people, i like brawling. you go into afghanistan you have guys who slapped women around for five years, guys who have no manhood left anyway so it's fun to shoot them. >> major galvin says when push came to shove, general mattis didn't have their backs. >> laura: thank you. joining us now is retired major fred galvin, author of the new book a few bad men. the true story of u.s. marines ambush in afghanistan and betrayed in america. this is so disturbing to me on so many levels come i want to thank you for being here. explain for the viewers at home why you chose to come forward now after all this time.

>> this is very important story and thank you for having me. this situation has not ever been fixed, it's not getting any better. we have a current situation and same command with three special operators right now encountering the same type of situation. they defended themselves, a story like david and goliath. a huge man assaulted them and now they are up for homicide, because they defended themselves and use the minimal force. our case very similar but it was in afghanistan versus this current case it's ongoing in iraq. our case we were attacked with a massive car bomb shot at both sides of the road. sniper fire, we fought our way out, then the information warfare started from the taliban. we get back -- the army who was in control of the special operations command turned this over and recommended we be charged with homicide -- this

case became handled by then lieutenant general jim mattis who was the commanding general. he had received all the sworn testimony from every single one of our marines to include the afghan interpreter who was also on patrol, they all said the same thing. even the marine that went down the road sang like a bird who said i think some civilians were killed that day -- his email that he immediately sent said the exact opposite. he perjured himself by stating it was indeed a complex ambush. we were shot at on both sides of the road. >> laura: i want everyone to understand that james madison first instinct -- correct me if i'm wrong, his first instinct seemed to be to disbelieve the men under his command and believe those who were not in his purview about whom he had no real understanding or sense of veracity. to give everyone a sense of how this was all reported, "the new york times" wrote this

the day of the incident. they said u.s. troops opened fire on a highway filled with civilian cars and bystanders, afghan witnesses and some officials explaining americans were indiscriminate lee shooting at civilian vehicles in anger after the explosion. i remember when this story was written and at the time i said to myself and i think my radio crew, this is -- b.s. it was a narrative they needed to sell and james madison who everyone said is the greatest thing since sliced bread, he bought into it. real quick. >> our entire command was anxious. general mattis sent those criminal investigators, he had the polygraph, he threatened to deport one marines family back to mexico who is legally naturalized and this is how we should never treat americans or we are going to use our morale and end up like russia,

incapable of ever winning another war. >> incapable of recruiting anyone to actually fight in our military after issues like this. thank you for sharing this story and your book. up next our good friend reacts to one of the weirdest and most unhinged specials able to be ever to be broadcast on msnbc, that video is shocking -- in moments.

as someone with hearing loss i know what a confusing and frustrating experience getting hearing aids can be. that's why i founded lively. affordable, high-quality hearing aids with all of the features you need, and none of the hassle. i use lively hearing aids and it's been wonderful. it's so light and so small but it's a fraction of the cost of the other devices. they cost thousands less. it's insanely user friendly. you take the hearing test online, the doctorams in the settings. you don't even need to go into an office. they're delivered to your door in a few days and you're up and running in no time. it connects via bluetooth to my phone. you can stream music and you can answer phone calls. the audiologist was so incredible

she's full of all kinds of little helpful hints i love it. they're a game changer for me. i feel like i can take on anything. it feels great to be in control of my hearing. better hearing has never been this easy. try lively risk-free for 100 days. visit listenlively.com

>> laura: we've showed you some bonkers stuff from msnbc over the years but we've just uncovered one of the most unhinged discussions ever. >> as black women every single thing about us is politicized and criminalized. everyone keeps saying we are in the midst of a national reckoning, i'm still waiting for that. what i think is more accurate is to say we have been in the midst of an awakening. we recently passed the crown act. people get it wrong when they think the crown act is just about hair. the crown act is about white supremacy. >> laura: here now is prager you personality and former left-wing activists -- there's a lot of problems in our country, a lot of suffering and concern.

is this among the chief concern is black women face today? >> not this black woman in particular. when i watched this video i could not believe my eyes. what you have as multiple rich, elite black women sitting at this beautiful dining table talking about of their oppression and what is at oppression look like? it looks like having the wrong hair and makeup when you show up to be on the news or do your own show. these women have made a lot of their money and their career off of talking about black oppression in america and if that is the best example that they have two make their claim, the need to stop doing this. >> joy reid was one of them who was chiming in. to add some more flavor to all of this, i think we need to hear from her, watch. >> how do we get our hair and makeup together? in the news business, beautiful hair would not have been allowed even five years ago. i'm on tv and i'm like i look a

mess. >> let me tell you this, the times cover they called me three days before and he said can you come into do a photo shoot? they did not tell me it was the cover, they said bring a yellow shirt and a blue shirt out of my closet. no wardrobe, no nothing. >> laura: that's a huge amount to sacrifice, isn't it? you only have three days notice. our member getting 20 minutes notice when i was invited on various shows. i never looked all that great either. >> the horror, i can't believe it, it's a wonder that i was even able to make it on your show tonight because i couldn't find somebody to do hair and makeup two this is the oppression we face on a daily basis. the fact that they can all sit at this table and preach and agree with this, it's absolutely ridiculous. >> they are all pretty good-looking, they all look pretty, they looked pulled together. thank you for joining us, great

to see you as always. we have a big update to an intoxicating story we brought you last night. what's on the horizon? the answers lie beyond the roads we know. we recognize that energy demand is growing, and the world needs lower carbon solutions to keep up. at chevron, we're working to find new ways forward, through investments and partnerships in innovative solutions. like renewable natural gas from cow waste, hydrogen-fueled transportation, and carbon capture. we may not know just what lies ahead,

but it's only human... to search for it.

last night we told you about th colorado -- the college world series jell-o challenge appeared arkansas spent $60,000 on jell-o shots and all the proceeds going to the food pantry. we have an update according to rocco's, arkansas 8,512 shots and ole miss had a whopping 9,360 shots. at $4.50 each, that's more than $80,000. i do want to think about the hangovers in that town congrats to ole miss. that is it for us tonight. remembered to get your gear at laura ingraham.com all

proceeds for the month of june will be donated to the honor flight network organization i want to thank you. remember kumble watch the show every night at 10:00 p.m. dvr i you can because it is america now and forever. greg gutfeld is up next. ♪♪ it's thursday. yes happy thursday, america appeared remember the good oldies old d's when the media actually cared. neither do i. today it is getting worse, especially when the favorite team is in power