as always thank you for being with us and making the show possible. please set your dvr so you never miss an episode of "hannity." for news any time, go foxnews.com or hannity.com and in the meantime, let not your hearts be troubled, the great laura ingraham is up next with another kick ass show. she had one last night and the night before. always killer shows. >> laura: you're just being nice. >> sean: did you get a haircut? i can barely see it. >> laura: they said that they curled her hair tonight, that's the big excitement. >> sean: i curled my hair tonight. >> laura: it actually looks really nice. hannity, by the way, i saw a screenshot of us from election night 2020, and let me just say that we both look really good still. [laughter]

that's funny. that's a long time ago. that's how long we have known each other. >> sean: there like 100 lights blaring in my face. >> laura: we will pick it up where you left off. we will try. i am laura ingraham, this is "the ingraham angle" from washington tonight. in a moment we will speak to one of donald trump's attorney is about ongoing battle over the release of the affidavit. but first, now since august 8th, the day of the raid on mar-a-lago, the end has been very clear, to at least half of the country this investigation appears to be tainted by politics. now the belief isn't grounded and some knee-jerk dislike of the rank-and-file fbi, but it's recent history. specifically the crusade waged by the deep state against donald trump from 2015 and onward. a two-tiered system of justice, one standard for hunter and hillary, and another for donald trump. fast forward to present day when

donald trump took another turn. the u.s. magistrate reinhard bart of jeffrey epstein fame, had reductions on certain lines of the affidavit which then will be released to the public perhaps late next week. various media organizations have petitioned the court to make public the full affidavit without any reduction. but of course the doj opposed the affidavits release making these broad claims at releasing even limited parts of the affidavit could create dangers for witnesses were future cooperations and also reveal key investigative methods. and for obvious dramatic effect, they drew in reference to national security stakes. none of that however seems compelling given what is at stake here. the public strikes to know along with the need to address skepticism in favor of releasing the entire affidavit.

no question in doing it immediately. and not just the affidavit, the security footage at mar-a-lago that was detained as well. we want to see that. dragon this on to the midterms with the with the drips and jobs being leaked it to key media figures who we know who they are like the amorphous references to nuclear documents, that is designed to do one thing, to distract and frighten the voters as they had to the polls in key housing senate races. to me it is also obvious at this point, now on the transparency issue, the angle is pretty surprised that the legal team chose not to file its own motion for a complete unfeeling. aaron blake of "the washington post" had the theory as to why saying seen the document remain mostly field is probably best-case scenario for donald trump. his supporters and many republican lawmakers declared the investigation as an abuse of power before having any information about it learning what prompted it only forced

trump and its allies to account for actual evidence. while, joining us now to clear things up, christina, thanks for being here tonight. you are in court today when the magistrate ruled. i'm curious about why you chose not to file an official motion or join another motion arguing this affidavit as you gave it a desire as he stated it for full transparency. >> he did say that, you're exactly right, we believe the judicial office of the party had argued quite well and we believe it was very interesting and encouraging that you had parties from both sides of the aisle of course outlets coupled with conservative lifestyle group together on the same side. and see how that played out reserving the rights to try something else in the future, and really just chose to see how it will play out.

>> laura: i understand that you chose to do that, but i'm wondering, are you not concerned that because you did not join any of these motions for again the full relief of this affidavit that you are then waving possible objections to the way reductions are being done by the justice department later on, because he did not speak today nor did you join any of these motions and they will redact all of this stuff and am not sure what grounds you are going to have at this point having waived your right to file those motions. >> we would maintain that we have not waived our right to that that is still maintained. we need to wait and see. i can be certain at this point, because we have not seen the affidavit and certainly have not seen the reductions and how it will play out, but we will be making that decision as it comes out. you know, we have to see it. we have not seen it and it has been under sale, so i don't know. we can't say.

>> laura: well, the spokesperson for president trump, taylor buddha which i believe spoke out today and you know, made another comment. yes, about how the democrats have a pension for using reductions to actually hide the governments deception and corruption just like they did with the russia hoax, so he is obviously concerned about this. >> yes, that is a concern. and certainly the judge giving the department of justice basically carte blanche opportunities to redact however they want to with whatever they want to, it is a concern. i think that is if your concern and something that we will have to deal with and figure out as it comes out and as we see what happens. >> laura: on the issue of the footage of where the documents were stored, much is being made of this footage that's was actually subpoenaed by the justice department, do you have any insight into what they claim

was some big concern about this -- what they understood to be secure areas such that it would just send this nine hour rate of mar-a-lago? >> i have no idea why they were particularly concerned about it. they had come out, the department of justice and the fbi had seen it firsthand and in person. and they knew exactly what it was and where it was and how it was secured, and so, the idea that they needed to read it to see it again after president trump himself had told them, you're welcome to come back if you feel the need to come back, so, i think that it's a bit disingenuous and typical of leftist media to come up with some salacious stories that do not make a lot of sense and the people scratching their head wondering what is going on, just hoping that it will pass. >> laura: sorry to interrupt, was there a limited number of people who had access to that storage room? it seems like a pretty important room as they made such a big

deal of it and have a lock on it and so forth, was there a limited number of people who could go in and out? >> yes, certainly mar-a-lago is secure and it of itself, just getting on to the compound is hard. and then it was a locked the door and getting back down into the basement there is security. you can't just walk down there. only certain members of staff can get there and there is only one key. so yes, it is a very limited number of people that have access down there. and it was enough to where our team believed that it was secure, not that they asked for one more lock and another lock which we did and then for whatever reason they excited that they still needed to raid the place. >> laura: and only one or two people had access to that room to your knowledge? >> that is my understanding. i would have to check with the maintenance of the area, but it's my understanding is a very small number that got in there.

>> laura: are you now asking the court i believe today i read that you guys are asking for that footage to also be released, am i correct on that? >> i would have to double check on that, but i think they are comfortable with that, yes. >> laura: that is a lot of hours of footage to release. christina, i know that you have had a long day and we really appreciate you joining us tonight. thank you so much pride in joining me right now is my article three president, former clerk for justice curse search and impeachment lawyer for president trump, let's start with you, was it a mistake for the trump legal team not to join one of these motions or follow one today. you heard what christina said, they thought these other motions were well done and well written and do not feel a need to actually make a case for themselves here. >> well, i would say this, the president company when he was president had the constitutional authority as commander in chief to declassify any record he wanted as the supreme court confirmed in 1988 in the

department of navy versus egan. the president also had the absolute all statutory authority to determine whether these records or personal records that belong to him were presidential records that go to the borough kratz and the archives that come back to his library as confirmed by a obama appointed judge in 2012 dealing the judicial lawsuit against clemson regarding the case in the sock drawer, so this is clearly legal grounds to challenge this raid and we also have a biased judge, judge bruce reinhardt recused on june 22nd in the lawsuit, civil lawsuit versus hillary clinton and have his 2017 facebook post where he has a clear judicial bias against president trump and has trashed president trump personally, so he violated the u.s. code in candidate to two and 2a, and needs to recuse him

from the case, so if i was advising the legal team i would say file a rule 41g emotion under the federal rules of criminal procedure to return the property and then you can duke out these legal battles right now. >> laura: and also a special master, right, david, would also be helpful here in order to act on these objections that they are going to have over the release of some of these documents in the redaction. there was no motion filed to call for a special master in this case, which look, it's been a while since i did this law, but that would be one of the first things i would ask for. >> i agree 100%. they say that they put a tape team in place, clearly a tape team and effective doors and appropriate, still part of the same doj and same team that has the same agenda. and should be a master appointee. but you started out this piece

by making the most important point, which it should be looked at in a vacuum. this is part of a longer program, the political weaponization of the justice department. i don't take this lightly, my father is an fbi agent and i have great respect for the agency traditionally. but here, listen, i don't think you can minimize the fact that to lisa monaco is a primary figure in the justice department. i'm sure involved in these decisions. she is in andrew weissmann colleague, came up with him and closed with him, we know what the agenda is for andrew weissmann and so on. i'm very, very extraordinarily disappointed in merrick garland and even more so, because he continues to make the statements like he did in the abandoned case with equal application of the law. that is nonsense. we know that the example that it distinguished by, and it is reprehensible, frankly. but the bubble, bottom line is we are not just speculating about possible conduct in the

past, we have the fisa warrant situation and know that misrepresentation was made to the most secretive and intrusive process in the country of the fisa court. so the american people deserve transparency here. and we have to have it. >> laura: they can't hide behind the broad language, i see right through that, mike. and we should point out that the national archives officials who notified the doj and the trump probe, they declined to do the same thing over the clinton emails, thousands and thousands of clinton emails, so said that he did not believe it was appropriate or necessary to notify the doj about hillary clinton's emails back in 2015. these are precisely the reasons while millions of americans think there is a double standard here. david just refer to it, so i know that people think nobody should criticize the fbi, god bless mike pence, but come on. >> and they are trying to turn

this if you are criticizing the political leadership of the fbi, they are trying to deflect the blame on criticizing the rank-and-file fbi agents and we are not, we are criticizing christopher wray, merrick garland, lisa monaco, assistant general for the attorney it is the political leadership of the joe biden justice department who up weaponized and politicize the justice department. that is nothing to do with the rank-and-file of the fbi. >> laura: david, how concerned are you next week that parts of this affidavit it looks like limited parts will be released? but don't you imagine that those with that release will be just one big sharpie across the page. everything will be redacted and you get very little information in my view and it will all look bad for trump. that's my prediction. >> you will see the forward affidavit written out possibly. i don't think that it will go much beyond that.

but it will have to be revisited. i think that it will have to go probably above judge reinhardt, i have had him on a case before. and i think you will have to go to the district judge eventually, but i think that that is right. i have twitted around today the idea of should we file for property? they know it is in that stuff better than anybody else and -- >> laura: yes, they should have, they're about ten motions that need to be funneled in the case, did you agree with me, mike? you have to have a flurry of motion to respond to the full force of the federal government's coming down on one man. i think were lying on judicial watch and -- you can't just piggyback on their motions. they have to know that former president of the united states is taking this very seriously and that's my view, but you know, i'm just -- mike and david, thank you both. joining me now, former secretary of state mike pompeo at the hudson institute, mr. secretary, great to see you and i want to jump right in.

democrats are so worried are they not about protecting democracy around the world and we all are, but when it comes to what is happening here in the united states, apparently the government will just use every bit of power at its disposal to target one man who is a likely 2024 presidential candidates, what are your thoughts on what you are hearing tonight? >> laura, you have it exactly right, there are no rules. it's just about power. and they have to give the benefit of the doubt talking about democracy and equal justice under the law, but we have seen it. we have seen my predecessor at the cia politicize and weaponize the cia, we saw jim comey who was a counterpart fbi without the cia director give away the funds and take notes and leak them to the press. we have watched the justice department under merrick garland go after her parents terrorists who are trying to make sure that their kids get to school, no reason to give them the benefit of the doubt. and has not been official, what

they did runs square against the central pieces which is about transparent equal application of the law especially when you do it again someone who was your former and could potentially be again your political opponent. we don't see this in america, this is not something that should go lightly and it is bigger than what just happened last week. >> laura: mr. secretary, we had hillary clinton's people destroying thousands and thousands of emails. this is when donors to the clinton foundation were trying to get into talk to mrs. clinton. you were secretary of state. imagine if you had done anything approaching what was going on when she was secretary of state. i would not even be talking to you right now. they were probably put you in rikers island. it is crazy. so that's why there is a double standard here. the national archive did not have any problem with that, apparently. >> don't forget that i was in the middle of that, with

trey gowdy. we were working to try to get access to her emails and her server, which everyone admits has high-level classified information and did not write her home or send the justice department and try to work through the problems in the tradition of america and violated the basic as your point is well taken, had my wife given speeches for $500,000 all across the world to foreign governments while i was current secretary of state i would have an orange jumpsuit and a prison number. >> laura: looking at you and your colors tonight, orange is not your color, mike. more of a darker huge person. i know you are interviewed by the january 6th commission, what can you share about to your lovely time with them? >> you know, they were chasing. a far field wandering interview, spoke the truth to them and can't tell you details. looking forward to discussions about the 25th amendment and

discussions i never seriously undertook with any of my counterparts. they were looking to build a story line at the conclusion of which was already written. >> laura: your reaction to what mike pence said up in new hampshire about how people should not criticize and be careful about criticizing the fbi, because that is criticizing the rank-and-file, i like mike pence very much, an old friend going back 20 plus years, but i was a little surprised by that, your reaction to what he said? >> we all friends, and two folks who used to work on my congressional staff who are now young kick butt fbi agents across america, good people hardworking folks that care about america, but when you have a politicize leadership in nk line looking at the job in helping the spokesperson on cnn, when you see the fbi engage in this kind of activity it is so deeply troubling. one could easily, easily take on the fbi leadership without aligning in any way those folks that are out trying to keep the streets safe and keep us safe

from crime all across the country. >> laura: what were you doing the night that liz cheney lost the race in wyoming? or are you surprised by that in any way, shape, or form? obviously you are friendly with the cheneys as many of us were, but that is the end of the era, is it not? >> yeah, i think it is. it's from a time gone by, a sense of she spent her entire time representing the people of wyoming and going after a single individual instead of representing the people of wyoming and they responded pretty clearly and sharply, pretty dramatically. >> laura: mr. secretary, it's great to see you tonight. thank you so much paired with all of the polls pointing to a massive red wave in november, you really think that the big tech oligarchs are going to stand by and just let this election play out? mollie hemingway, victor davis reacted to silicon valley's frightening plan to change your vote after this.

>> laura: the big tech centers poised to strike again just in time for the midterm, during covid they silenced doctors who dare to question mask and vaccine mandates, some appear on the show. today they are threatening to do

the same to tamp down the vast amounts of what they claim our online rage fits being expressed online. now axios is reporting that big tech will ensure that they won't be caught flat-footed again. but the day louche of a disinformation aimed at delegitimizing the election process. putting the block on new ads the week of the midterm, and has vowed to remove any disinformation and twitter is enforcing its civic integrity policy, and labeling what they call questionable tweets. axios sadly declared even the most careful defensive tactics by the most popular social media firms won't be able to help the spread of election misinformation including the big lie. here now mollie hemingway, senior editor at the federalists, fox news contributor and david hansen, senior fellow at huber. molly, of course they all have

the dangers of giving us the forward to big lied to justify these roles that they have taken on as proxy centers for joe biden, but don't you think this is ironic as the biggest lie is the claim by facebook, twitter, and google that they are somehow unbiased and simply working for the public good. >> the social media company is are a huge threat to public discourse, the political debates, they meddled heavily in the 2020 election, the even meddled in previous elections, but they really ramped it up in 2020. they censor affective voices that go against what they would like people to say. they do platform people for sharing true information such as what they claim as misinformation and disinformation, the story of the biden information in the hunter biden laptop. and do things like privilege communication doing this to the top of inboxes while repressing public communications. they do, and when you think back

to the russia collusion hoax which was based on $100,000 in facebook ads that russia spent, there is no comparison to what social media companies did to help joe biden win and other democrats win and to harm the chances of republicans. this is a -- they are announcing that they are doing it again. it is a major problem. >> laura: well, victor, the heritage foundation just for an example of how this might work, the heritage foundation posted on their facebook page about that irs job post that had required knowledge of how to use deadly force, right? so sure enough, the truth police slapped missing context label on that. now i have a feeling we will see a lot more of that in the coming months. was it a fact that they asked that you have to be willing to use deadly force as an irs agent or not? the fact is yes they did, and slap you with the label.

>> you know, the axios' article was disinformation about disinformation, they said that we don't want to be caught flat-footed. we are not prepared, but in fact the progressive journalist in "time" magazine gushed after the election of how they weren't flat-footed and had preemptively decided big tech would censor things that were injurious to the biden campaign to work with corporate america and big labor to tone down the protests before the election and may be inside them after if joe biden were behind. and to get democratic activists and legal packs to go into key states and to change the voting laws and then of course to have over $400 million in "dark money" to observe the registrars, and it worked. not only worked, but work so well they could not keep quiet about it and they bragged and bragged. so now they are worried that everybody has read that and is prepared, so now they are saying

we are very naive. we don't want to get caught flat-footed. and gushed after the election how post fecteau and how naive when he did not have any idea what he was up against, us. so the arrogance was really overwhelming. >> laura: another thing happening on the disinformation deal is the democrats are actually trying to get to big tech to label as stiffs information republican outreach for hispanic voters, which obviously is going really well, and it is in this ridiculous nielsen report from last year. basically saying that it has found that websites and apps more popular with latinos and other groups make them more susceptible. the exposure to misinformation and sharing it at 28% of content that they see on news websites they've most frequently visit would flag the bias conspiracy

base or pseudoscientific, molly, what are they talking about? except that republicans are doing really well, so it must be misinformation. that's what we are up against in the midterm. >> i was reading the second axios article saying that to misinformation for hispanic voters to believe that democrats weren't helping out the economy. first of all, this is wrong, democrats are in complete control of the federal government to end they are directly responsible for so many of the economic problems that are happening, but even if you disagree, it's just that. a disagreement. it's not misinformation or disinformation, misinformation and disinformation is cowords for things we wish people were insane because it hurts a political chances or hurt the political power. and this is again just a problem because the republican party over the last few years has become much more multiracial and working class and how political power.

they are growing and people on the left are worried about that and so they are trying to label effective communication or even fact as misinformation and disinformation. >> laura: it is insane, victor, as he pointed out many times, facebook, mark zuckerberg, what did he invest? $419 million in his education efforts, voter education efforts for all that misinformation he was combating? >> yes, he observed with the work of the local and state governments, but you know, how it all went about, laura, was the bottom line was nearly 70% of the votes for the first time in american history were not cast on election day. and yet the error rate and particular states had gone from 2-3% when absentee and early doubting was half than that, 1.1 and 1.2, so the less said the more votes you cast and not on election day where you had to fill them out, of course you will have less thrown out. it was absurd.

and now mark zuckerberg is it promoting the policy, he sent and i'm going to do it in 20242022 what he did in 2020 which if you follow big tech, that means of course i am, but i will be smarter about it this time. so they won, and their own words, they were very successful without strategy, that nexus of corporatism, the law, the media and big tech and big money and they want to do it again and they will try to do it again. >> laura: republicans better be ready this time and not be caught flat-footed. molly, victor, thank you. now the joe biden administration wonder drug to fight covid not only can give you a second bout of it, but can also come with a distasteful side effect. i will give you a hint, hot garbage. plus some suggested reform to help rochelle berlinski on the state, my cabinet is next, stay

there.

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 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

mystical musical >> i think our public health infrastructure in the country was not up to the task of handling this pandemic. we made some pretty public mistakes and we need to own them. >> laura: no big deal. they have an omission by the cdc director only two years too late. after lockdowns destroyed the education of countless young people after they trashed our economy, we saw drug alcohol abuse, depression skyrocket, but as long as you make a big admission, no problem. now to help dr. wilensky out with her overhaul of the cdc i found various members from the past two years of the medicine cabinet and they came up with some useful reforms that she should put into place immediately. first and foremost, fire everybody at the top including herself. next only get funding for the cdc from congress. no special interest money because they have a stake in all of these policy debates, give up

all of their patents, and you have to have complete data transparency. that is just the start. joining me now, campus full of medicine as well as dr. peter mccullough, epidemiologist, of the covid-19, let's start with you, do you have any reforms to add to that list? i know it is a long list we have been compiling, but that is just the start. >> i think the 1, stop telling noble lies, noble or otherwise, do not use your power to manipulate human behavior just tell people the truth. don't lie about natural immunity or whether the vaccine stops transition, don't lie about masks, tell the truth about all of these things based on what the science is saying. that would be a really good reform i think to start with. >> laura: well, and i think when we look at this dr. macola over the last few years it really -- it is so overwhelmingly

fraudulent what was done to the american people. you are at the receiving end of a lot of the campaigns of villain ionization and it is still happening. many of the people that all of us know across the country and health care professionals who are being harassed and penalized for being right. >> it is true. americans imposition like myself have lost their confidence in the multibillion-dollar agency. from these erratic yet recommendations on patrol, vaccination, and the lack of not only data transparency, but data analyses, the cdc and fda owed america and monthly data analysis on the safety of the vaccines, they should have had external safety boards in place and should have external oversight in multiple aspects of the agency, and i completely agree that everybody needs to go and we need to install regular

and regular's oversight from congress in the senate. >> laura: dr. harvey said she is retiring from the ale this weekend and i will phone and because i can actually go, but had some interesting comments that i would like you to react to you about the agency's internal review that is being talked about. and said that she failed to address the industry subservient and epidemiologic incompetence of what is at the heart of all of this. how could the cdc gets so much science so wrong with this lame apology or whatever this qualifies as, dr. macola? >> i think a big problem was all of the social distancing they were doing themselves. they weren't meeting, they were trying to do work by webex for a couple of years. this cdc is full of wonderful and talented physicians and scientists, but they got into a direction that went horribly

wrong, and i think that we do need to do a deep postmortem on what happen with the agency. >> laura: basically another report that just came out basically implies that the mandate that they put out based on the two dose vaccine was useless. that the boosters themselves wayne and efficacy over time. so there is a limited value, limited duration value of all of this. but again, people are still following this original guidance on the vaccines, and it is a reduced transition. but the cdc is implicitly admitting now that they don't stop transmission of the virus, that was the entire basis of the vaccine mandate and is still going on for the cms and for health care facility is all over the united states and schools and colleges. >> yes, i think that the cdc has

caused untold harm by basically not actually acknowledging the scientific fact that the vaccine does not stop transmission. and you are right, it's a basis for all of this which so many people have lost their jobs. it is absolutely destroyed confidence in public health and i think that it has also had a consequence of reducing public other vaccines. and they are quite important for public health. i think it is a complete disaster, not enough just to apologize or acknowledge wrongdoing, there needs to be a fundamental overhaul. >> laura: back to dr. macola, we have doctors and pediatrician still badgering parents every time you going to get a checkup. have you given your kid a vaccination, it could be like six months old and pressuring these parents about these vaccinations still. that is borderline malpractice in my view. >> the doctors have drunk the

kool-aid, the doctors are a big part of the problem of this kind of negative legacy, we have had on the field vaccine program, doctors really need to come in mind. the cdc has basically said they vaccinate a person is completely indistinguishable from an unvaccinated person. we need to drop these mandates and thoroughly review what has happened. >> laura: or ramp up the lawsuits. two of my absolute favorites, and can you believe it? numbers are suddenly not woken off anymore. numbers, rights, the left new target is masks, here on that stupidity next.

♪ ♪ >> laura: woke, mask, i kid you not, what is happening in minneapolis, the public school will spend $2 million to conduct ethnic rachel and cultural diversity starting in the fall by adding cultural and linguistically responsive materials. >> often times in mathematics, pictures, images, words matter. we received patterns and trends for example of animals being

represented in the mathematics of the curriculum. our students are not animals and we need direct connection to how math is alive and well in their daily practice, and so things we were really sensitive to the images that were being presented. >> laura: keep that woman away from education, joining me now is former left-wing activists. you keep thinking i have heard it all, but is math not math anymore? it has a cultural responsive role to play? >> apparently it is not math anymore, wokeness must be injected into things that we hold together as a society, and what is happening here. if you want to look in and encourage people that the pathway to equitable math instruction is where a lot of this has started and is actually heavily funded by the bill in the melinda gates association, a man who has gotten so much money and power off at the back of the

mathematics has done this i cannot say, but when you go and talk about how math is used as white supremacy and the being a perfectionist or only one right way to answer a question even objectivity is an extension of white supremacy. >> laura: you know it is really cool? at least right now from my perspective you are echoing a little bit that it is almost sounding like -- this is a culturally responsible segment. because it is a little bit of a thing going on here. it sounds pretty cool. i want to say this, the free speech organization called speech first, they just released a report finding that amongst a freshman college orientation, less than 30% discuss free speech while 90% discuss diversity, equity and inclusion, this comes as we are learning that the diversity of oregon

suggest faculty to a dei test before hiring and promoting staff members. it is clear, look, colleges and universities from admissions applications to assignments to hiring, it is all woke all the time with rare exception. >> you are absolutely right, and oregon is the perfect -- that state and governor have decided a proficiency rate for graduating as long as you have to be proficient in math and reading and writing in oregon, and apparently not an education to get higher education anymore. it's not about liberal education anymore. it's about creating activists. >> laura: all right, it is great to see you. i'm not sure what is happening with the audio, but this is live tv and what happens. i have a message to everyone including people right here at the network, this will be brutal. they are celebrating the firing of someone over at cnn. now my response might surprise

you. and that's why you are watching.

[acoustic soul music throughout] [acoustic soul music throughout] [acoustic soul music throughout] [acoustic soul music throughout] [acoustic soul music throughout]

>> all right. let me just say no one somebody dancing on the grave of someone who just lost his job. it is terrible. before laughing at brian tonight, no job is safe, everyone is replaceable, everyone makes mistakes, even me. >> brian for cnn, let me ask brian stelter. i'm feeling not -- nostalgic. who was this man i spot on the train? it was brian. he tweeted i'll admit having sore feet if laura admits taking creep shots. for the record i did not take that shot but someone on the train did and they forwarded it

to me. thanks for being a good sport brian. for the sake of social order, even with these cute orange socks of yours keep your shoes on in public. >> no bare feet on a train, plane. best of luck brian. hope you land on your bare feet. "gutfeld!" is next. [applause] >> happy thursday everyone. but it's really not that happy. first of all we have some sad news forward this show. brian stelter is leaving cnn. apparently he wants to spend