evening, as always thank you for being with us, thank you for making this show possible. please set your dvr so you never, ever ever miss an episode of hannity. for news anytime foxnews.com, hannity.com. in the meantime, let not your heart be troubled, not getting a compliment for the rest of the week, that's it. they're over. they're done. laura ingraham ready to take you home the rest of the way. >> laura: no. well, well, wait a second. yeah, you're right. no more compliments. just kidding. >> sean: i don't care. go ahead. >> laura: no, i am going to offer a compliment to president trump. did you see that speech today? i think you played a clip or two from it. >> sean: it was great. >> laura: people are like he's not substantive. he as not substantive? what other politician in america can keep a crowd in wrath attention for 90 minutes straight? it was great. >> sean: from my perspective, when he's on issues and he's standing for the forgotten men

and women and running that campaign i think he's unbeatable. >> laura: fantastic, yeah, absolutely. fantastic show tonight sean i'll pick it up where you left off i am laura ingraham this is ingraham angle from washington tonight. the china bluff. that's the focus of tonight's angle. will she or won't she? so who's bluffing? china or pelosi? now nancy's really tough when she's wagging her finger at trump or ripping her speech up at the state of the union. but is she tough enough to defy both our pentagon hand ringers and the ccp? she has a long history of at least speaking out against the evils of china. >> and just because china is a big economy and because we have a big relationship doesn't mean that the challenge to our conscious, if we don't speak out against china, we lose all moral authority to speak out against any other country. with china's wto obsession is simply giving china a blank

check to fail to comply with market p china has charged over -- changed over 30 years in some respects, it's appalling that its human rights record is worse snooped fantastic i can't believe i'm saying that about nancy pelosi. but now third in line to the presidency she has a golden opportunity to move beyond rhetoric and actually strike a blow for liberty. now, since we learned about her intention one week ago to travel to taiwan, powerful forces here and in china have been trying to wave her off with not so subtle threats. >> the chinese side has repeatedly made clear to the u.s. side our serious concern over speaker pelosi's potential visit to taiwan and our firm opposition to the visit. we are prepared for any event walt if the u.s. side insists on making a visit, the chinese side will take firm and strong measures to safe guard our

sovereignty and territory integrity. >> laura: of course when china barks, nook we biden flacks flinch. no need to be mean president xi. that kind of rhetoric from the chinese side is clearly unhelpful and not necessarily. again there's been no trip announced and there's no call for that kind of ex claytory rhetoric. >> laura: what a weenie. unhelpful? actually i think it's very helpful because it's always helpful when the american people get to see china for what it really is. a ruthless dictatorship that has grown so powerful it thinks it can dominate us and it's helpful for us to see just how weak and pathetic our own government is. of course in reacting to china's own aggression, pathetic. and even worse than kirby's flaccid response is the fact that we're actually rewarding the communist party of china after they threatened the speaker of the house. now, biden is reportedly

expected to speak with xi by telephone on thursday. this is an absolute embarrassment. this would never have happened under president trump. i'll tell you what the agenda's going to be. xi gets what he wants, he promising nothing and biden's comes team declares progress has been made frfrmths everything from tensions of taiwan to war in ukraine as well as how we better manage competition between our two nations, certainly in the economic sphere, there's a host of issues, and this is a call that has been scheduled for a long time. >> laura: oh, for a long time. well, joe biden thought his long friendship with xi was going to mean xi would be nicer to us. ♪ >> laura: of course, the man's never been right about a single

foreign policy matter in his life. never. and don't you think chinese intelligence knows this? they knew biden was weak before he was president. it was so easy for china to compromise the biden family with some sweetheart deals. piece of cake. and they know biden's even weaker now. the ccp couldn't ask for a better scenario. a hobbled u.s. president who they already have in their back pocket. it's like taking candy from a memory care patient. well, smartly, prominent republicans are speaking out supporting pelosi's trip. this could be a rare moment of bipartisan. >> speaker pelosi should absolutely go forward with her trip to taiwan. she might want to consider adding a prominent republican like kevin mccarthy the house republican leader to show the bipartisan support that exists in this country for taiwan. >> laura: now, refusing to bow to the people who you slave labor to make t-shirts and flip flops would be the smartest

political move nancy pelosi has ever made. yeah, maybe ever. the only question is, will she let herself be talked out of it by a bunch of nervous fellies ins the defense department? now, biden already tipped his hand about what he thinks. >> mr. president, do you think it's a good idea for speaker pelosi to travel to taiwan this summer? >> well, i, i, i think that the military thinks it's not a good idea right now. >> laura: and our establishment's official newspaper of record, the new york swine published a shore filled with administration leaks that the military is very concerned that pelosi's taiwan stopover could provoke china into doing something very dangerous. huh. you notice that we didn't see any anonymous pentagon sources or anyone in the white house concerned about provoking vladimir putin in ukraine. i wonder why.

last time i checked russian is a nuclear power,:it's important to understand this. four distinct groups opposed to upsetting china and therefore insistent to nancy pelosi cancelling the trip. the military knows china is dangerous they said much. >> aggressive and irresponsible behavior represents one of the most significant threats to peace and stability in the region today including in the south china sea. see beijing combining its growing military power with greater willingness to take risks. >> laura: but our military leadership, current and retired, they're compromised. >> i'm not sure what positive can come out of it, and there will be some signal, some measure by the chinese in response to a pelosi visit. not a good idea. >> laura: now makary and company were embarrassed with the outcomes in iraq and afghanistan and they don't want to undergo the kind of reform in the military that's actually needed for us to be able to beat the

people's liberation army. >> second of course is the business community. they never want to provoke china no matter how many labor camps china is operating. >> we are a brand of china and for china. do you feel you have to sacrifice your values at all as a company to do business there? >> not at all sarah we participate in sport all over the world including china. chine is i is a very important market to us we continue to invest in china and will continue to invest in china. >> laura: big business entire agenda is to make it easier for themselves to set up shop in china and ultimately ship more american jobs over there. third, well, the academics and universities make so much money off china, remember the research grants, swanky trips thousands of chinese students, 350,000 to be exact studying in the united states, they don't want anything to jeopardize that. that's a cash cow. of course of course our regime media. they've always loved carrying water for china. they know they'll be really

embarrassed for getting it wrong all these years if pelosi goes over to taiwan and is treated really badly by the ccp. so they don't want her to go because it would expose their complicity. so all these forces protecting china, they already know that president xi is evil and is the single greatest danger to freedom worldwide. they already know that. and yet they choose to do nothing. and instead, well, our military of course focusing most exclusively on europe, they know full well that xi is a murderous dicktorial thug yet they choose the pass of more not less economic engagement of him and complimenting removing trump's tariff the administration is critical of leverage we need at this time. so the ball is now in speaker pelosi's court. she's never known as someone easily intimidated. we know that about nancy. but if china can get her to back off, it's going to be a crushing blow to u.s. power and our

prestige. it's humiliating. >> if the speaker of the house now allows some second rate chinese foreign diplomat to issue a statement and change the direction, change the actions that the united states will take because we are fearful of them, we are in for a long struggle and it will not end well with that kind of failed leadership. it tells every one of our allies in the region, the japanese, south koreans, don't hang with center city they're fearful. >> laura: the problem isn't pelosi's decision to show support to the people of taiwan that's admirable. the problem is that from day one the biden administration has established a reputation for weakness and incompetence, not just in domestic affairs but foreign affairs as well. and this encourages china to bully and embarrass the biden administration at every opportunity. so right now, chinese officials are banking on a continuation of the status quo. the slow, but sure, capitulation

of the united states. let's face it xi thinks democracies are weak and he believes that america and europe will eventually become his puppet states. so pelosi needs to call everybody's bluff, refuse to change her travel plans because, if she does not, she might as well give xi the string. and that's the angle. if she went through with the trip, pelosi wouldn't be the first sitting u.s. speaker to visit taiwan that would be my next guest joining me now is newt gingrich fox news contributor author of the fantastic book defeating big government socialism. mr. speaker, we have pictures up right now of your own trip to taiwan back in 1997. since then it's quite amazing that no house speaker has traveled there. the excuse is always given that, you know, that china has gotten more aggressive, so we've got to be careful not to provoke them. but what does that say about us? >> well, i have to say laura, i

was a little surprised to realize i was the highest ranking american official ever to visit taiwan. we did so as part of a trip the chinese communist had invited us to shanghai and beijing i went with a bipartisan delegation, one of the points i would make to nancy pelosi is very important, make a bipartisan delegation. we had 11 members, including john dingle, a senior democrat at that time. and we said to them, just before the trip started, by the way, we're going to go to taiwan. they were furious. they did everything they're doing right now. they threatened, they bullied, they bluffed. and gardener peck ham our national security advisor i remember being near him he was on a phone call with the chai knees ambassador and finally said, look, the chinese communists are not the travel guide for the american speaker of the house. if you don't want him to go to

china, they'll skip china and go to taiwan. all of a sudden they said no, no, no. the only condition was we had to go china, japan and then back to taiwan. we couldn't goat directly from main land china, the communist part, directly to taiwan. the president of taiwan met with all of us, bipartisan delegation. they were thrilled that we were there. i was really surprised to realize that that 1997 visit was the last time that a senior american leader had actually visited taiwan. i encourage nancy to go, particularly now that it's public. i think it would be humiliating and destructive if she were to back down. and i have to say, having a woke defense department that's not sure it can deal with the american speaker going to taiwan, makes you wonder what they would do in a real crisis

>> laura: yeah, well, $800 billion a year, that's their budget. so newt here's how the white house tried to explain biden's stance. watch this. >> you can't say whether the president personally would support this trip even in a hypothetical. >> i have not spoken to him personally. you heard him someone, maybe someone on your team asked him a week ago last wednesday about this particularly, specifically, about the speaker's travel. i'm not going to go beyond what he said. >> laura: newt, now, this is no small issue, and she's claiming that she hasn't spoken to the president about it? really. >> sure. well, i believe that. i mean, you got a guy who has cognitive challenges, i'm not sure he knows where taiwan is. why would -- and the press secretary doesn't know anything. so why would you think that a woman who did not know anything and the guy who can't remember what it is he used to know would actually have a conversation about a topic that's only very,

very important? i think you have to recognize, this is very simple. if speaker pelosi backs down, what the chinese communists will learn is one more example of american weakness at a time when the biden administration was defeated in afghanistan, has failed totally in ukraine, and continues to signal its utter weakness. this would be, i think, increasing the danger of a communist invasion of taiwan. on the other hand, if speaker pelosi decides, as i hope she will, to take a bipartisan delegation, so it's very clear to the chinese communists, whether you're a democrat or a republican, we are for the freedom of taiwan. >> laura: right. >> from not being invited. i think that's important historically. >> laura: it would be amazing for her legacy. i'm not trying to give her legacy advice, that's a separate

point but it would be great for her to separate herself from the herd mentality which seems to be moving to protect china's interests in the united states. so i think she's smart enough to do the right thing. i hope so. newt you were the perfect guest tonight. thank you so much >> the indictment of a former president, perhaps candidate for president, would arguably tear the country apart. is that your concern as you make your decision down the road here, do you have to think about things like that? >> we pursue justice without fear or favor. we will hold accountable anyone who is criminally responsible for attempting to interfere with the transfer, legitimate lawful transfer of power from one administration to the next. >> laura: just minutes after that interview aired the washington post conveniently dropped their story announcing that the justice department is officially investing president trump's actions in a criminal probe related to january 6th

saying people familiar with the probe said investigators are examining the former president's conversations and have seized phone records of top aides. here now is jonathan curly george washington university law professor and fox news contributor. professor your reaction tonight. it was all too cute the interview followed by the story. >> well, it was a complete package, wasn't it? but the gist of what the attorney general said is una salably true. obviously if there was evidence of criminal contact by any president including former president president trump, most of us i hope would say he should be charged. i felt richard nixon should have been charged. i felt bill clinton should have been charged. those were easy cases, straightforward crimes that i think could have resulted in rather quick convictions. that's not the current situation with donald trump. you know, the j 6th committee

said they would be presenting new evidence showing crimes committed by president trump. they really haven't made that case yet. they haven't put on a great deal of new information. now, this new, this grand injury may have new information, but they need to be able to make that case with some clarity. you know, if they can do it, then most people would say, sure, you know, if there's clear evidence of a criminal act, no one is above the law. but after all this time, and after nine hearings, we still have not seen that case being made with clarity. >> laura: well, professor the idea that there would have to be, i believe, specific intent to disrupt a process in the u.s. government, a proceeding in the u.s. government. not that he thought he was legally entitled, right? under the constitution, to this particular remedy, or approach. that's what my understanding of

the case is. they haven't shown specific intent. again, to me, that's what it looks like thus far, but we don't have all the facts. >> i think they're very murky on these critical elements, and that came out in the january 6th committee. you know, they repeatedly and consistently refused to give alternative explanation or evidence. they edited evidence to take out what might be mitigating material, even statements from trump. that's not how you build a case. that ace how you might build ratedings but not how you build a case. hopefully the justice department is goings at this more in a systemic professional way but we still don't see those critical linkages you talked about particularly intent. he had two teams of lawyers and one team of lawyers was saying, yeah, you can do this. now, the committee said, well, no one would believe that to be true. well, a lot of people believed it to be true. i didn't. i wrote at the time i didn't think there was a case to challenge the certification or

the election. but to just assume intent that you just referenced is not a very strong case to make. you need something more direct. and that's what we had with nixon and clinton who were not charged criminally but that's what they'll need with president, former president trump. >> laura: it begins to look like a political vendetta to prevent someone for running for office and succeeding and winning the presidents again to millions and millions of americans. jonathan great to see you tonight thank you >> new evidence reveals president biden is now the weakest incumbent in moesh american history. we have monica crowley in just moments. you won't believe it. stay there.

blendjet's summer sale is on now! cool off with this hot deal on blendjet 2. it packs the power of a big blender on the go, and it crushes right through ice. just drop in your favorite ingredients, even frozen fruit,

and make a smoothie any time, anywhere. blendjet cleans itself. just add a drop of soap, water, and blend. recharge quickly with any usb port. order now on blendjet.com and kick off the new year right!

♪ >> laura: all right. it's early in the process but is joe biden the most historically weak incumbent in american history? consider a few data points. a new cnn poll of registered democrats and democrat leaders asks who do you think the democrat party should nominate as the democratic party in 2024. just 25% want biden while 75% want a different candidate.

well, how mightily has he fallen? the same poll five months ago showed 45% wanted biden, 51% wanted someone else. this might be the most shocking of all, a new poll out of new hampshire has bidenen trailing mayor beaver cleaver pete buttigieg while kamala is in 7th place. joining me now tom bevin and monica crowley. monica crowley podcast host, i love that podcast. tom, has there ever been a modern president in this position that biden finds himself in? >> well, hard to say. i mean, there are two that come to mind obviously lbj in '68 right dropped out after the new hampshire primary facing ma carr i didn't have anti war candidate. he was afraid he wasn't going to win the nomination. and then you had jimmy carter, right, who got a challenge from

ted kennedy. ted kennedy won 12 contests in that primary, and took it all the way to the convention, which is the last time that we had a contested convention. carter and lbj had approval around biden, where biden was carter had inflation numbers gas lines rationing all that. so a lot of similarities. no question biden is definitely weak and you throw on top of it his age being the oldest president, currently would be way older than anyone to run again and he is in a very, very weak spot and i think you see that's why democrats are positioning themselves and looking for -- hoping that he's not going to run again but privately plotting for a plan if he does decide to run again. >> laura: monica, the mayor pete metric is really quite shocking, given what a goof ball he is. i mean, we have all these problems with the airlines, right? huge problems at our port,

supply chains and pete buttigieg is talking about marriage equality or flowers, i don't know what he's talking about but he's not talking about the issues that we care about. and yet he's beating biden in new hampshire. how significant is that? or not? >> yeah. well, imagine how desperate you have to be as a political party in america to think that small town mayor pete could be your presidential savior. this is how desperate they all are. i mean, mayor pete, let's face it, he's done a horrible job as transportation secretary. he had no qualifications for the job to begin with, laura, as we know. but he is essentially an overrated non-entity. and yet, in new hampshire, democratic voters seem to think that he's the guy to reach for. look, this is an indication of the catastrophic failures, the historic ca takes rower that is joe biden's presidency in every direction from the economy to the border to foreign policy. everybody sees it including members of his own party to the

point where members of the squad like aoc and just over the last decory bush refused to say whether they would endorse him if he decides to run again. so clearly the democrats are not going to run joe biden and they have a kamala harris problem, she doesn't even rate in these polls at all and she's the sitting vice-president. so the question is to whom do the democrats turn tgavin newsome, michelle obama, lease all essentially retreads in one form or another but i think a lot of decision making is going to wait until president trump makes his decision about '24. >> laura: and tom part of the issue is that the biden team, they can't channel clinton's, you know, i feel your pain message. they just blame everybody else. >> there's no question that these are challenging economic times. the president has acknowledged it. this economy that we are facing is the result of a pandemic. this pandemic that remains with us, as well as russia's war on

ukraine and we know that has disrupted our economic system and global markets as well. >> laura: tom, american people going to buy this, not their fault? >> no, i don't think they are. i mean, biden wants tots take credit for the good parts of the economy and blame all the bad parts of the economy on putin and i just don't think that's going to sell with voters particularly independent voters in november. >> laura: the buck stops somewhere. tom and monica, great to see you. thank you >> now those most interested in further regulating and grabbing your guns are constantly revealing how little they actually know about firearms. now, take rhode island rep david sicily. >> with this, depicted here, when the test here turns this weapon into an automatic weapon, this bump, it becomes a bump stock. >> he just described the arm brace, which is used by people who have a handicap, to help

fire a pistol, he just described it as a bump stock. they have no idea what they're trying to ban. like if they could use wikipedia or a picture or something here really quickly to understand that what she's offering has nothing to do with a bump stock. >> laura: joining me now is congressman tom massie the man you just saw explaining the basics of a gun structure to that democratic representative. congressman have they figured out yet what they're trying to ban, other than saying weapons of war, which is a tedious phrase. >> they have such zele to ban everything and my col we shall michelle offered, i just want to make sure you're banning this device used by disabled people to fire a pistol and that's when they said it was a machine gun. look, this is a trend.

we could laugh more at their ignorance but here's the problem laura. their ignorance causes them to write bills that will cover law abiden citizens. they wrote a bill a couple weeks ago and pass it to cover gun traffickers but i pointed out to them it would cover victims of domestic violence if they merely borrowed a gun from their neighbor. in the same bill that they passed last week that cicilline was talking about, they're trying to ban bump stocks but it will cover a mechanism that lightens the trigger pull, makes your gun easier to fire. time and time again they're over legislating i would say because of their ignorance. so i'm torn. do you educate them or let them flop around. the problem is when they flop around they ban everything. >> laura: tonight on nbc, merrick garland the attorney general, congressman issued a warning. watch this. >> these very cheap devices that can be made at home, that can

transform a semiautomatic rifle or semiautomatic to. >> you just saw a demonstration where a semiautomatic weapon became a machine begun essentially. >> exactly. >> laura: your response. they're coming for the guns, no doubt about it. >> you saw there they're going to make the argument that if a cheap thing can convert a semiautomatic into a fully automatic then they have to ban all semiautomatics and that's what they want to do. they're calling these weapons of war laura. so i offered an amendment that said let's make sure we don't give weapons of war to the department of education and to the usda, what possible use could they have for those in their mission and the democrats argued that the department of education needs what they're calling weapons of war. of course they're not weapons of war, but that's the way they want to, you know, vilify common gun owners. >> laura: well, they think if they own the language, they'll own the argument, right? so a nine millimeter, you're

saying a nine mill matter a clock 33 or 19 or 17, that ultimately is what they want to ban, right? that's ultimately where this is going. >> well, your honor, biden called it the lung blower. the 223 round is the one that they're really vilifying now in the house of representatives. but i pointed out they're not banning a 30 odd six which is more than twice as powerful as the 223. it's not about the ballistic or the lethality of the gun it's about how it looks. they want to ban a mini 14 in one form but not ban it in another form. i had to show them in a picture. they were banning and unbanning the same gun. >> laura: the problem is you can't trust them or their motives, they hate the constitution. thank you for pointing it out. you schooled buttigieg last week on the grid and sisialen this week. >> why is gavin newsome challenging tens of thousands of

truckers in the middle of a supply chain crisis? an unbelievable report in a moment.

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 constitution. t thousands less. it's insanely user friendly. you take the hearing test online, the doctor programs 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: up until today, the port of oakland was brought to a grinding halt as independent truckers blocked all access to it protesting the golden state's golden boy, gavin newsome. now many truckers are saying that the california governor is taking away their ability to win. fox matt finance is in our studio with the details. matt. >> laura the third busiest port is now open after hundreds of truckers interfered were operations in a week-long protest over california's abfive law now in effect after the score last month denied a review brought by a california trucking company. the ab-5 law requires independent truckers to either set up their own corporation or be forced to become employees of trucking companies impacting an estimated 70,000 truckers who own or lease their truck working

as contractors while taking advantage of the employers insurance discouncil. the law could force independent drivers out of business while reducing trucking capacity. here's one trucker who says ab-5 could put him out of business unless governor newsome intervenes. >> i'm losing everything, my truck, my overpriced truck, the 17 years i've been dedicated to working here in the port, i'm based out of pork of oakland, due to ab-5. gavin newsome, he can do something. he hasn't done anything. eventually i think he builds the shortage in truckers because he's trying to push 70,000 out. >> governor newsome is standing in support of the ab5 law urging the protesters who shut down the port of oakland to focus on supporting the transition. ab5 was enacted in 2019 so no one should be caught by surprise by the law's requirement at this time and there are still

truckers protesting at the oakland port. the president of the oakland port services says that truckers have been restricted to designated free speech zones or face arrest. laura. >> laura: i love those free speech zones. matt thanks so much. joining me now is california assembly man also vice chair of the transportation committee. assembley man you say this is not just a local issue you say it will impact everyone. how so? >> this law is i will conceived we warned the governor when he signed it in 2019 but those 70,000 independent truckers represent 70% of the truckers that operate in and around the ports of california and 40% of the products and goods that come into the united states comes through the ports in california. and 30% of our exports go out through the ports. so this is a massive impact and

could disrupt our supply chain not only within the united states but globally. >> laura: so the reference to the, quote, transition, we've heard this in so many sec tours of our society with the high gas prices, with everything with the supply chain that we've been experiencing and once again in this protest, this is all about moving people along to the transition away from fossil fuels. is any of this realistic given what needs to move as far as commerce in this country? >> it makes no sense. we have been telling the governor that we need to make policies in economic reality. and what he is proposing is some rigid ideology that makes no sense in the real world. we need to get products not only to the stores but to our homes. and so in a time when we're dealing with persistent inflation, we are going to have a situation where there's not enough truckers to get products to the stores, to people's

homes. that means shortages in stores, that means more inflation. everything's going to cost more. this is disastrous. >> laura: well, they already have a shortage of truckers, don't they assemblyman fonsghchlt you've seen ads all over the place for long haul truckers. they can't get enough truckers and now they're going to make life more miserable for them. again makes zero sense unless you want to actually kill off an industry. >> absolutely. we need 80,000 more truckers nationally, and that's going to worsen by 2030. that may double. we may need 160,000 more truckers by 2030. so this law only makes it worse. we're going to force truck drivers out of state or to retire completely and that's just going to exacerbate an already stretched supply chain. >> laura: the voters of california -- i mean, none of this is working. they have to choose a different path going forward.

thank you assemblyman fong for raising this. last we showed you how la officials were lying about covid rates in order to reimpose their masking requirements. they love the masks. we just got our hands on hue video on their defending this madness and you will not believe the defiance. we're going to show it to you in a moment. so we need something super disctintive. dad's work, meet daughter's playtime. wait 'till you hear this— thankfully, meta portal helps reduce background noise. zero lace model. adjusts to low light. and pans and zooms to keep you in frame. take a look at this. so the whole team stays on track. okay, let's get you some feedback. i'm impressed. great, loving your work. meta portal. the smart video calling device that makes work from home, work for you.

do you have a life insurance policy you no longer need? now you can sell your policy - even a term policy - for an immediate cash payment. call coventry direct to learn more. we thought we had planned carefully for our retirement. but we quickly realized we needed a way to supplement our income. our friend sold their policy to help pay their medical bills, and that got me thinking. maybe selling our policy could help with our retirement. i'm skeptical, so i did some research and called coventry

direct. they explained life insurance is a valuable asset

♪ >> laura: now we told you last week how la county led by public health director barbara fa rare a was trying to reinstate an indoor mask mandate based on phoney statistics. the angle has exposed her lie. this mandate may not go into effect but that doesn't stop her from lashing out. >> i'm well aware the unhappiness many are expressing about the possibility there could be universal indoor masking if we don't see signs of slowing transmission. i'm also aware of masses misinformation campaign that question both the effectiveness of masks as well minimize the dangers of sars company v two. both of these campaigns hurt our community. >> laura: where is she? i don't i don't know where she is in that video.

what hurts the community is when public health officials like ms. ferrer, she's not a doctor, when they use scare tactics to try to grab power. we thought she was bad her supervisor is even worse. >> i'm particularly struck by kind of the blow back from a number, though not a really significant number, of sort of, you know, snow flake weepys about how oppressive it is to wear a mask. i don't hear them writing me about shoes which are actually more oppressive to your feet than wearing a mask on your face. >> laura: joining me now is dr. jay professor of stanford school of medicine. dr. b will california residents ever escape their madness? i guess if the political leadership doesn't change. this is like groundhog's day. >> it's amazing to watch laura. i can't fathom that a public health professional looking at the data on mask mandates in the

past, completely un -- making no dent on case rates then concluding that we need another mask mandate. the case rates are coming down in la county without a mask mandate. what does she think causes case rates to go up and down? they have the illusion of control over the threat of the virus that they cannot let go. >> laura: and they are so miss rabbit when they feel like they're losing power. i mean you can feel the bitterness. they were never happier than when we had that daily briefing from fauci and then they all got their marching orders. they were never happier. and now with florida and texas numbers, all of it we see, south dakota numbers, it's beyond obvious none of these closures made a difference. >> yeah, and the key thing tour is we now have a large fraction of the population that have had covid and rovrmentd also a large percentage of the population

that were vaccinated. which means cases can come and go they will forever laura but they're not producing deaths at the same rate. she called it misinformation to look at a basic fact which is covid is much less deadly now than it was in 2020. that is a fact. it's kind of shocking to me. because i think if la brings back mask mandates now on the basis of the facts that we're seeing in front of us that means we'll have mask mandates in california, in la, forever. >> laura: never going to end. i want to ask quickly about this monkeypox situation, the washington post reporting that the white house is estimating it needs $7 billion to mount a response to it. they're considering announcing a monkeypox czar and declaring a national emergency. really quickly, your thoughts. >> i mean, i don't think it should be an emergency. it is a serious problem for certain communities. i mean, gay communities, i think. and actually here you can use

contact tracing and there's an effective vaccine. there shouldn't be an emergency but there should be public health responses >> laura: dr. goode to see you tonight as always. and up next raymond arroyo was here so what was that about? stay there. - i'm norm. - i'm szasz. [norm] and we live in columbia, missouri. we do consulting, but we also write. [szasz] we take care of ourselves constantly; it's important. we walk three to five times a week, a couple miles at a time. - we've both been taking prevagen for a little more than 11 years now. after about 30 days of taking it, we noticed clarity that we didn't notice before. - it's still helping me. i still notice a difference. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. before creditrepair.com, i knew i didn't have credit.

i still notice a difference. i knew it was an issue that i had to tackle if i wanted to start a family. they told me what i needed to do to get my credit to where i wanted it to be. these people are legit. they changed my life.

♪ bum bum ♪

♪♪ here goes nothing. hey greg? uhh, hello? it's me, your heart! really? yes, oh recording an ekg in 30 seconds! tada! wow that was fast. you know it! kardia offers the only personal ekgs that detect 6 of the most common arrhythmias in just 30 seconds. so you can manage your heart health from home or on the go. your heart rhythm is normal. no arrhythmias in sight. i wonder what my doctor would say? ooo, let's find out! with kardia you can email your ekg directly to them or sent to a cardiologist for review. kardia can do all that? all that and then some greg. kardia also gives you access to heart health reports and automatic ekg sharing. what next? let's get some fresh air. been cooped up for too long. yeah... ♪ bum bum ♪ kardia mobile card is available for just $99. get yours at kardia.com or amazon.

. >> laura: wait a second, raymond arroyo, what are you doing here? >> i'm here to help the ratings. no, i'm teasing tomorrow's seen and unseen laura. i reported yesterday on the theme park, the violence at theme parks. i have an amazing update tomorrow and a big reveal people will not want to miss. i'll give you a clue. a star rising in the east and a tour. i'll say nothing else. . >> laura: wait. i saw it on line you announced your book tour. >> no, don't say anything. >> laura: you announced your book tour it's on line.

and i've seen the cover it's unbelievable. >> but nonetheless has i'm going to share that tomorrow. >> laura: okay, okay. raymond thank you. thank you and i can't wait. >> see you tomorrow. >> laura: that's it for us. don't forget set your dvr to stay connected with us and thanks for watching it's america for now and you bet forever. gutfeld takes it from here. ♪♪ >> greg: i just came from the spa. my nails look amazing. amazing. happy wonderful tuesday everyone. but first, just some somber news tonight. a good pal of the show, paul sorvino passed away yesterday. he was an amazing actor and one of our first guests on this very