0 only reason they are using drugs is because somebody is allowing it. it all boils down to congress. >> hannity: this isn't a fixable problem. we're running out of time. you get to give me final grade. what do i get? >> b-minus. >> hannity: why a b-minus? >> i think you're coming in from a different direction. like at davos. >> hannity: laura is next. thanks for being with us. let not your heart be troubled. **. >> laura: i'm laura, welcome to the "the ingraham angle." we begin with the latest classified story and biden's latest attempt at deflection. >> we found a handful of documents that were fouled in the wrong place. we immediately turned them over to the archives and the justice department. we're going to get this resolved quickly. i think you'll fine everything is fine. i have no regrets. >> laura: love the reading. something tells me that he doesn't really believe that because tonight we're learning that we could see get answers to one of the most important outstanding questions. who actually had access to those documents? first of all, the white house press corps has thrown out, we've got to give them some credit, the occasional tough question, media, for the most part, has been basically regurgitating white house talking points. why exactly are republicans demanding visitor logs from president biden's private home? they know full well there are no visitor logs. it's never been standard practice. they don't exist. >> the white house yesterday said no such records exist. >> the secret service and the white house counsel's office says look, we don't have those logs. >> laura: not only is the secret service saying no such thing, but the fox news has learned that the secret service is prepared to give congress the names of any visitors, they have documentation of, to biden's delaware home if they are asked. that's a great start but what about working to get access to the pen center visitor's log as well. why is that important? according to the freebie con, since biden took office in 2021 is, the china has poured millions of dollars into the university that houses his think tank where at least 10 of those classified documents were identified. in case you believe biden's claim of there is no there-there and think that the documents held at the biden penn center were much adu about nothing remember what biden's legal team did at the time. >> the efficiency call that the president's permanent attorneys made on november 2 was not to the f.b.i. that they had found what we now know were top secret documents out in the open. the first call was to officials here at this white house in the west wing. how is that the right thing? >> laura: look at his eye? h comer has now called for him to release donations to the penn and the biden center in china. a penn spokesperson says that the penn-biden center has never solicited or received any gifts from any chinese or other foreign entity. 100% of the budget for the penn biden center comes from university funds. okay. well, that, of course, doesn't answer the question of whether or not chinese donations to u penn actually ended up being funneled to the biden center. that's a cute little way they tried to avoid it, though, isn't it? joining us now is congressman jim jordan, chairman of the house judiciary committee and member of the oversight committee. congressman what can you tell us tonight about how these two stories, visitor logs to the biden, at home in delaware, and the penn biden center issue with the chinese donations to the university itself? >> well, i'll start with the latter. so first of all we know that it's been reported that china gave millions of dollars to the university of pennsylvania. it's been reported that china gave millions of dollars to the university of pennsylvania and to the biden center at the university of pennsylvania, and then we know, of course, classified documents were found at the university of pennsylvania biden center, and then we know when joe biden became president of the united states, he made the president of the university of pennsylvania the ambassador to germany. and now the university of pennsylvania says, oh, we don't know anything about donations from china. none of that makes sense. that answer makes no sense. so chairman comer is going to get the records of who gave money to the university of pennsylvania. he's determined to do that and to the former question, he specifically is looking to get the visitor records from the secret service of who went to joe biden's home, and then also, who had access to the penn biden center at the university of pennsylvania. >> laura: were you surprised, sir, at the white house response on the visitor log question to biden's home? they were so dismissive saying they don't exist. of course, he -- i mean, we all know he has secret service protection for life, and we know that they have a record of everyone who comes in contact with him. so why would they have said that, do you think? >> i think -- everyone is surprised at every response we've continue from the white house. everyone is surprised at how this whole thing has unfolded. i still don't know the answer to why they were looking in the first place. what prompted them to go look at the penn biden center or were they specifically going to look for classified documents that might have been there? i don't know the answer. all kinds of questions we don't know the answer to. this is what we'll be looking at on the judiciary committee, i think it's interesting how the doj has responded. we've seen all kinds of things inconsistent. why didn't they pick up the documents? there are all kinds of questions but my gut tells me the reason we see these inconsistencies from the department of justice department is because this is the same doj that spied on parents and targeted parents. this is the same department of justice that paid information to sensor it and keep it from the american people. this is the same department of justice that we believe has retaliated against the very whistleblowers from the f.b.i. who have come and talked to us about how political that place has become so i guess we shouldn't be surprised when we've seen what we've now witnessed from the doj relative to the classified documents and joe biden. >> laura: now, one of the arguments being put forth kind of in defense of biden is this. watch. >> this kind of classified spillage happens almost literally every day and most of the time it's completely accidental. most of these cases are dealt with administratively, internally with a similar conversation with the security officer at the agency in question. >> laura: congressman, do you agree that this is most likely just an administrative error? >> well, it sure doesn't seem like it and if you're not president of the united states or secretary clinton you don't get treated way these individuals have. there have been all kinds of examples where people who are in our national security apparatus, when they do something wrong with classified documents they get severely punished. i don't go along with that but again, that's what they are going to say. what i do know is what the american people see which is this different treatment for biden and president trump, and i always point to the example with secretary clinton because i remember specifically asking this question when we were on the benghazi committee. you got 60 something thousand emails on your personal computer, personal server. we don't need to see the person things. we believe in privacy. we should protect that but we don't exactly trust you and your lawyers to give us everything that we're entitled to see and more importantly the american people are entitled to see so how about we do it this way. how about we pick neutral third party and thlet them decide. she said, we're not going to do that and she destroyed the emails and compare that to president trump. he didn't get to have his lawyers decide. he didn't even get have neutral third party. they just came to his residence and took it, with helicopters and cnn cameras everywhere. that's what frustrates america so much and that's why we're going to do the investigation that we need to do to make sure this kind of stuff stops. >> laura: congressman, good to see you tonight. thank you. our next guest says the entire saga is part of an inside hit job meant to hobble biden, and basically, end his 2024 aspirations before his campaign even started. here to explain why is florida congressman matt gates. congressman, now fox is reporting that any decision from biden is not going to come until after he delivers the state of the union. so what do you ultimately expect that decision to be? >> things in washington aren't always what they seem. consider this. it was joe biden's democrat personal lawyer who was rummaging around in his stuff looking for, what, evidence for a crime, that -- committed nine years ago and then he alerts the democratic staff at the white house that does the absolute worst thing you could possibly do. they sat on the information. they should have defused the trump matter and inoculated themselves in the process and the moment this is leaked to cbs you have the democrat-biden department of justice appoint a special counsel and now the big tell is that even joe biden's strongest allies in the congress, like senator coones are saying they approve of the appointment of a special counsel to criminally investigate the president. maybe the deep state have figured out they would rather roll with gavin newsom and joe biden. the republicans may not even have to help the democrats take out their trash. >> laura: congressman, before president biden answered the question on the classified docs today, he snapped. watch. >> you know, i'll answer the question. but here's the deal. you know, quite frankly, what bugs me is that we have a serious problem here that we're talking about. we're talking about what's going on, and the american people don't quite understand why you don't ask me questions about that. >> laura: now, congressman, first of all, gavin newsom is ominously standing right behind him which is kind of eerie but he seems to be cracking up in front of our eyes, president biden. he's glued to his briefing paper. he seems kind of out of it after he gives a few remarks. he still seems kind of lost on the stage. >> joe biden is mad and he should be. his own department of justice is now criminally investigating him. his own staff put him in a terrible position by sitting on this information. and his own lawyer was searching around for the evidence of a paperwork crime from almost a decade ago. so i get why joe biden is mad. you could see gavin newsom's thought bubble in the background. he's actually measuring the drapes inside the oval office right now but remember, just because the permanent bureaucratic state picked joe biden over donald trump in 2020 it doesn't necessarily mean that they are going to pick joe biden going forward in 2024. they may realize he's old and breaking apart and they care about power for the left. don't forget that. it's not about joe biden. it's about maintaining power for the political left and they may think that he's a bad bet going forward. >> laura: now, this moment, congressman, from cnn, lens credence to your theory. watch. >> despite his denial, a review of the lapta data as well as other public material shows that joe biden did -- while serving as vice president though it's unclear what was discussed. >> laura: congressman, quickly, if cnn is turning it over, what's happening, what's going on here? >> i'm old enough to remember when cnned to us that the laptop was russian disinformation, and now all of a sudden they are weaponizing the truth against joe biden. he's looking more and more troubled as a candidate going forward. i don't think it's just a coincidence that this leak went to cbs news right as the cement is starting to harden around joe biden's decision to put together a political team for the upcoming primary. blood is in the water and the democrats are circling the carcass. >> laura: congressman, gets to see you. we finally have the long-awaited report from the marshal at the u.s. supreme court who was investigating the dobbs leak. well, what were the findings? eight months after politico printed that draft opinion we still don't know who was responsible for leaking it. are we believing any of that? how rigorous was this information? the marshal didn't even subpoena any information. employees provided call and text records, only on a voluntary basis. was it's transferred directly to politico, opinion? we don't know because the system lacked substantial logging and search functions. and the investigation focused on court personnel, temporary, law clerks and permanent employees. in other words, no justices were part of the inquiry. joining us now, molly hemingway, editor and chief at the federalist, and fox news contributor. somebody who knows the court well. molly, i mean, when i was clerking, the computer system was pretty rudimentary, in 1993 and 1992. but still, you know, you had to log on and log off. i would imagine now the system is pretty sophisticated given the ability to hack. does any of this add up to you? >> well, the time to find out who the leaker was was immediately after the leak. as this report notes, a lot of these people are temporary employees. they might not even be around. it didn't seem like a really serious effort to find out what had happened. and it should have been a serious effort. this leak led to an assassination attempt on a sitting u.s. supreme court justice. it's also led to security problems for all of the justices who voted, who ruled in dobbs. this is such an important issue to get right, and justice -- chief justice roberts did not seem to take it very seriously. it was a very lax investigation. the marshal of the supreme court didn't seem to have the skills required. an outside firm was consulted, but not anything near the level of what should have happened. if you really wanted to determine conclusively who did this. >> laura: we found out in the reporting, molly, that a few of those interviewed by the marshal's office and the investigation admitted to having told their spouses about the draft opinion which is a no-no. >> a huge no-no. >> laura: you're lectured the moment you walk into that court you cannot tell anyone, spouse, friend, doctor, therapist, anyone, about what happens inside the court. they had to annotate their affidavits to that effect. >> and there are so many clerks who take that very seriously and would never disclose anything. this is why it's almost as much a cultural issue as what are the security systems in play? the security systems that chief justice roberts has in place are not sufficient. but more than that, there needs to be a personal ethic that these clerks abide by where they take it seriously and you know most clerks do take it very seriously but we did learn here, we also learned that a lot of these clerks lawyered up in the face of this investigation. there were a lot of people working to protect information, and you said that no supreme court justices were interviewed. that's a little bit ambiguous in that it didn't specifically say they weren't, just that they focused on the others. and i do think it's reasonable to assume that justices should have been interviewed and should have discussed what they knew. >> laura: all right, molly, thank you so much. now, the events in davos reveal one really big thing. china kind of represents what the elites crave. power and control. and, oh, yes, domination. my angle explains this in moments. stay there. as someone living with type 2 diabetes, i want to keep it real and talk about some risks. with type 2 diabetes you have up to 4 times greater risk of stroke, heart attack, or death. even at your a1c goal, you're still at risk ...which if ignored could bring you here... ...may put you in one of those... ...or even worse. too much? that's the point. get real about your risks and do something about it. talk to your health care provider about ways to lower your risk of stroke, heart attack, or death. learn more at getrealaboutdiabetes.com