Laura Ingraham Lashes Out at Dem Rep in Fiery Fox News Interview
Laura Ingraham couldn't seem to stop herself from fuming at a Democratic lawmaker who called for the return of the Maryland man wrongly deported to El Salvador.
The Fox News host came out guns blazing on Tuesday night as she interviewed Arizona Rep. Yassamin Ansari, who went to El Salvador on Monday to visit the deportee Kilmar Abrego Garcia.
'You think that your trip to El Salvador would somehow deliver what you think is due process for Mr. Abrego Garcia?' Ingraham said.
'I believe that the president needs to follow the law in this case,' Ansari began to say, referring to the unanimous Supreme Court decision ordering the Trump administration to 'facilitate' Abrego Garcia's return to the U.S. after the government admitted it made a mistake in deporting him.
But Ingraham immediately cut her off, saying: 'It seems like a political stunt.'
The two women continued to speak over each other until an exasperated Ingraham told her guest that the crosstalk is 'annoying for the viewers.'
Over the next few minutes, Ansari stressed that Abrego Garcia's case was a bipartisan issue concerning the rule of law while Ingraham rolled her eyes and doubled down on the Trump administration's talking points about the deportee's alleged gang affiliation and history of domestic violence.
Toward the end of the fiery conversation, Ingraham brought up an unrelated case of an immigrant who was charged with the murder of his Maryland girlfriend.
'You are changing the subject,' Ansari fired back, triggering another round of crosstalk. 'Today, we are here to talk about the lack of due process for an individual who was illegally deported from this country… Any violence against anyone in this country is appalling.'
At one point, the congresswoman was talking about the Constitution and the Supreme Court when Ingraham cut her off again.
'Just wait, take a breath,' the Fox anchor said, raising a finger at Ansari. 'If he's undeported [sic], he will be deported from the United States. That will make you miserable, correct?'
Ansari began to respond but Ingraham bid her goodbye as she moved on to the next guest: 'We got it, we got, we got it. You will never support the deportation of this individual; that is the truth.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
37 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Scott Bessent Accuses Gavin Newsom of Threatening 'Tax Evasion'
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent accused California Governor Gavin Newsom of "threatening to commit criminal tax evasion" after the Democratic leader suggested in a social media post that the state should consider withholding federal tax payments in response to possible funding cuts from the Trump administration. Newsweek has reached out to Newsom's press office for comment via email on Sunday. Why It Matters The Trump administration has threatened to withhold federal funding from various state programs and institutions, including research and education programs. Last week, CNN reported that the administration is considering cutting grant funding to the University of California and California State University systems. In late-May, President Donald Trump threatened to pull "large scale federal funding" from the Golden State unless it bars transgender athletes from competing in girls' sports. Bessent's remarks come amid ongoing tensions between federal, state, and local authorities as protests continue in Los Angeles, which were sparked following immigration raids during which police followed the Trump administration's directives to arrest people. Some protesters have thrown rocks at officers, with one allegedly throwing a Molotov cocktail, and burning items in the streets. Agents have used tear gas on the crowds. The clashes highlight deepening conflicts between sanctuary jurisdictions and federal immigration policy, as Trump has implemented sweeping changes through executive orders and deployed the National Guard against local leaders wishes. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on May 7. Inset: California Governor Gavin Newsom speaks in West Hollywood, California, on March 26. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on May 7. Inset: California Governor Gavin Newsom speaks in West Hollywood, California, on March 26. Photo by Corine Solberg/Sipa USA/Aaron Schwartz/AP Images What To Know On Friday, Newsom shared a screenshot of a CNN article on X, formerly Twitter, about the Trump administration's potential move to cut federal funding to the state, writing, "Californians pay the bills for the federal government. We pay over $80 BILLION more in taxes than we get back. Maybe it's time to cut that off." Californians pay the bills for the federal government. We pay over $80 BILLION more in taxes than we get back. Maybe it's time to cut that off, @realDonaldTrump. — Gavin Newsom (@GavinNewsom) June 6, 2025 His post followed a CNN report that the Trump administration is targeting California's public university system over alleged antisemitism on campus. The administration has already taken similar action against Harvard University. California is the most populous state in the country with over 39 million people. It leads all the states in federal tax collection, with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) reporting that California contributed around $806 billion to total IRS collections in the 2024 fiscal year, which is about 15 percent of the national total. A recent analysis by the Rockefeller Institute of Government found the state contributed $83.1 billion more in federal taxes in 2022 than it received back. In response to the governor, Bessent, who oversees the IRS, wrote in an X post on Sunday: "Governor @GavinNewsom is threatening to commit criminal tax evasion. His plan: defraud the American taxpayer and leave California residents on the hook for unpaid federal taxes." Governor @GavinNewsom is threatening to commit criminal tax evasion. His plan: defraud the American taxpayer and leave California residents on the hook for unpaid federal taxes. (1/3) — Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent (@SecScottBessent) June 8, 2025 In a follow up post, he wrote: "I am certain most California businesses know that failing to pay taxes owed to the Treasury constitutes tax evasion and have no intention of following the dangerous path Governor @GavinNewsom is threatening." In a third post, the treasury secretary called the governor's comments "extremely reckless." Federal law defines a willful attempt to evade or defeat federal taxes as a felony under United States law. The public clash comes as Newsom is sparring with Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth over deployment of the National Guard, and potentially active-military Marines, following protests in California sparked over federal immigration enforcement operations. Hegseth wrote in a Saturday evening post on X that in addition to mobilizing guards, nearby Marines may also be called upon, writing, "And, if violence continues, active-duty Marines at Camp Pendleton will also be mobilized — they are on high alert." What People Are Saying White House spokesperson Kush Desai told CNN in a Friday statement: "No taxpayer should be forced to fund the demise of our country," in regard to certain California policies related to energy and immigration. "No final decisions, however, on any potential future action by the Administration have been made, and any discussion suggesting otherwise should be considered pure speculation." Robert Rivas, speaker of the California State Assembly, wrote in a BlueSky post about the CNN article on Friday: "This is unconstitutional and vindictive. We're the nation's economic engine and the largest donor state, and deserve our fair share. I'll use every legal and constitutional tool available to defend CA -- we must look at every option, including withholding federal taxes." What Happens Next? The tension between the Trump administration and Newsom don't show signs of easing.
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Suffolk jails forced to hold 125 prisoners set for transfer because of state chaos
Suffolk County's jails are being forced to hold onto 125 felons who were supposed to be transferred upstate — with officials blaming state government chaos for the delay, The Post has learned. County Executive Ed Romaine blamed Gov. Kathy Hochul and said housing a growing number of state prisoners is putting staff in a dangerous situation as taxpayers are on the hook for hundreds of thousands in estimated extra costs. 'They've been convicted and are supposed to be in state prisons and they're not because the state is just not taking them,' Romaine told The Post. Advertisement 'Now, why is the state not taking them?' the Republican added. 'Well, [Hochul] fired 2,000 corrections officers striking for better working conditions and she's closing prisons around the state.' 4 Suffolk County's jails are being forced to hold onto 125 felons who were supposed to be transferred upstate. New York Post Under state law, inmates sentenced to hard time in state prison are supposed to be transferred upstate within 10 business days. But Romaine said that has changed in the aftermath of labor unrest with the corrections officer union and Democratic governor. Advertisement He said the delays are now causing headaches across the system, from administration to the inmates themselves. Most of the detainees in the two county jails — in Riverhead and Yaphank — are people accused of low-level crimes that are being held for trial and have not been convicted. They are now bunking alongside convicted criminals who were intended to only pass through the system. 4 Under state law, inmates sentenced to hard time in state prison are supposed to be transferred upstate within 10 business days. Suffolk County Executive Ed Romaine pictured. James Messerschmidt Romaine added that the influx of roughly 125 felons is raising serious safety and management concerns for staff. Advertisement 'Our jail staff are already spread thin,' Romaine wrote in a letter to Gov. Hochul in May obtained by The Post. 'I understand that the state faces similar staffing challenges, but it is unfair to shift this burden to the County with minimal financial compensation and little to no collaboration.' The state Department of Corrections and Community Supervision blamed the backlog on system-halting staffing shortages that were sparked after the state fired 2,000 corrections officers who participated in an unauthorized, nearly month-long strike in March. 4 Romaine added that the influx of roughly 125 felons is raising serious safety and management concerns for staff. Newsday via Getty Images Romaine shot back that the staffing shortages should be Suffolk's problem. Advertisement 'The law says they're state ready, then they need to be in state prisons, not local jails,' he said. New York State is reimbursing Suffolk $100 per day for every inmate stuck in the county jails, but Romaine said the county pays $250 per day for each, meaning taxpayers are on the hook for the extra $150. 'The warden and his staff calculate that we have expended approximately $280,000 in excess of what we have received from the state to house these state ready but unclaimed prisoners since February,' Romaine wrote in the May letter. 4 New York State is reimbursing Suffolk $100 per day for every inmate stuck in the county jails. New York Post More inmates in lockup means more guards are needed to work — with more overtime costs, he added. Romaine warned that if the backlog continues, it could lead to dangerous overcrowding and unravel the work the county has been doing to improve jail conditions. 'This is unsustainable long term,' he said.
Chicago Tribune
an hour ago
- Chicago Tribune
What to know about President Donald Trump's deployment of National Guard troops to LA protests
President Donald Trump says he's deploying 2,000 California National Guard troops to Los Angeles to respond to immigration protests, over the objections of California Gov. Gavin Newsom. It's not the first time Trump has activated the National Guard to quell protests. In 2020, he asked governors of several states to send troops to Washington, D.C., to respond to demonstrations that arose after George Floyd was killed by Minneapolis police officers. Many of the governors he asked agreed, sending troops to the federal district. The governors that refused the request were allowed to do so, keeping their troops on home soil. This time, however, Trump is acting in opposition to Newsom, who under normal circumstances would retain control and command of California's National Guard. While Trump said that federalizing the troops was necessary to 'address the lawlessness' in California, the Democratic governor said the move was 'purposely inflammatory and will only escalate tensions.' Here are some things to know about when and how the president can deploy troops on U.S. soil. Generally, federal military forces are not allowed to carry out civilian law enforcement duties against U.S. citizens except in times of emergency. An 18th-century wartime law called the Insurrection Act is the main legal mechanism that a president can use to activate the military or National Guard during times of rebellion or unrest. But Trump didn't invoke the Insurrection Act on Saturday. Instead, he relied on a similar federal law that allows the president to federalize National Guard troops under certain circumstances. He federalized part of California's National Guard under what is known as Title 10 authority, which places him, not the governor, atop the chain of command, according to Newsom's office. The National Guard is a hybrid entity that serves both state and federal interests. Often it operates under state command and control, using state funding. Sometimes National Guard troops will be assigned by their state to serve federal missions, remaining under state command but using federal funding. The law cited by Trump's proclamation places National Guard troops under federal command. The law says that can be done under three circumstances: When the U.S. is invaded or in danger of invasion; when there is a rebellion or danger of rebellion against the authority of the U.S. government, or when the President is unable to 'execute the laws of the United States,' with regular forces. But the law also says that orders for those purposes 'shall be issued through the governors of the States.' It's not immediately clear if the president can activate National Guard troops without the order of that state's governor. Notably, Trump's proclamation says the National Guard troops will play a supporting role by protecting ICE officers as they enforce the law, rather than having the troops perform law enforcement work. Steve Vladeck, a professor at the Georgetown University Law Center who specializes in military justice and national security law, says that's because the National Guard troops can't legally engage in ordinary law enforcement activities unless Trump first invokes the Insurrection Act. Vladeck said the move raises the risk that the troops could end up using force while filling that 'protection' role. The move could also be a precursor to other, more aggressive troop deployments down the road, he wrote on his website. 'There's nothing these troops will be allowed to do that, for example, the ICE officers against whom these protests have been directed could not do themselves,' Vladeck wrote. The Insurrection Act and related laws were used during the Civil Rights era to protect activists and students desegregating schools. President Dwight Eisenhower sent the 101st Airborne to Little Rock, Arkansas, to protect Black students integrating Central High School after that state's governor activated the National Guard to keep the students out. George H.W. Bush used the Insurrection Act to respond to riots in Los Angeles in 1992 after the acquittal of white police officers who were videotaped beating Black motorist Rodney King. National Guard troops have been deployed for a variety of emergencies, including the COVID pandemic, hurricanes and other natural disasters. But generally, those deployments are carried out with the agreements of the governors of the responding states. On Sunday, Trump was asked if he plans to send U.S. troops to Los Angeles and he said, 'We're gonna have troops everywhere. We're not going to let this happen to our country. We're not going to let our country be torn apart like it was under Biden.' Trump didn't elaborate. In 2020, Trump asked governors of several states to deploy their National Guard troops to Washington, D.C. to quell protests that arose after George Floyd was killed by Minneapolis police officers. Many of the governors agreed, sending troops to the federal district. At the time, Trump also threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act for protests following Floyd's death in Minneapolis – an intervention rarely seen in modern American history. But then-Defense Secretary Mark Esper pushed back, saying the law should be invoked 'only in the most urgent and dire of situations.' Trump never did invoke the Insurrection Act during his first term. But while campaigning for his second term, he suggested that would change. Trump told an audience in Iowa in 2023 that he was prevented from using the military to suppress violence in cities and states during his first term, and said if the issue came up again in his next term, 'I'm not waiting.' Trump also promised to deploy the National Guard to help carry out his immigration enforcement goals, and his top adviser Stephen Miller explained how that would be carried out: Troops under sympathetic Republican governors would send troops to nearby states that refuse to participate, Miller said on 'The Charlie Kirk Show,' in 2023. After Trump announced he was federalizing the National Guard troops on Saturday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said other measures could follow. Hegseth wrote on the social media platform X that active duty Marines at Camp Pendleton were on high alert and would also be mobilized 'if violence continues.'
