0 possible. set your dvr so you never miss and episode of hannity. let not you heart be troubled, "the ingraham angle" is next and i hope you and your family have a great weekend. >> i'm sean duffy in for laura ingraham. this is "the ingraham angle" from new york city tonight. take everything. that's what merrick garland signed off on when he personally approve of the search warrant to raid trump's mar-a-largo home last week. the warrant was unsealed today and created more questions. why did the agents need to take everything under the sun. agents can take any government or presidential record created between january 20th, 2017 and january 20th, 2021. that cover it's his entire presidency. and this raise was so urgent because the left claims there's national security could have been at risk after all, why did it take days for them to execute the warrant? the judge signed off on the warrants on august 5. the raid didn't happen until august 8. do fbi agents not work on weekends? what is more, is that trump would have had these documents for more than 560 days since he left the white house. 560 days. if this is so serious, what took them so long? so far as the actual -- so far as the actual documents, we have a list now, it's not a very good list, of what was taken. here's what could have been a threat to our national security. the grant of clemency for roger stocks, two binders of photos. there were boxes that were designated top secret boxes that trump said were declassified. we still don't know what the agents were really looking for. the "washington post" reports the raid was related to nuclear documents. even politco doesn't bye that writing we've seen enough trump scandals in the last seven years to know that sometimes potentially explosive allegations from anonymous sources fail to detonate. you wouldn't say, huh? well, i could have told you that. any american could have told you that. the warrant reveals the doj is investigating trump over three different laws, concealment of records, falsification of records in federal investigation and the espionage act. what? that's it? that's the whole question? what? this is absurd on every single level. there's one more question i have that disgraced deputy director andrew mccain may have answered for us. what is the end goal here? >> the going through all of this material very closely to figure out whether or not there's actually evidence in here that supports any of the charges. i should say, will any other charges. so the investigation is not limited to the three statutes that they cited on the search warrant. >> sean: joining me now, christina bob. she was on the site of mar-a-largo when the fbi raided her home. good to see you. i want your take on this. we have liberal commentators saying boxes in president trump's basement are a risk to national security. however, hillary clinton's server that any foreign entity that is not a fan of the united states of america can access is not as dangerous. what say you? >> yeah, absolutely. the warrant proves that everything the democrats have been pushing down our throats the last few days is baloney. none of it passes muster. this warrant is clearly politically motivated and for no other reason. as you mentioned in your monologue, the fact that the warrant was signed on a friday, most likely a friday afternoon, august 5, you know, they didn't want to work on the weekends. let's take the reground and regroup monday. what is weirder about this, this grave national security matter that was so important that we had to violate fundamental rights of a president of the united states, the judge gave them two weeks to execute it. the warrant didn't expire until august 19. they had two weeks to execute this. you want me to believe this was a grave matter of national security that warranted violating constitutional principals and you can take your time? that doesn't pass muster. >> sean: and he had the documents 15 years. if they were so sensitive, they would have gotten them day 3 or day four. not 160 days. so the feds came to mar-a-largo in june. they asked for documents. you said, you know, we provided the documents to the feds. since that time in june and to the time of this raid on august 8, did they'd ask for any additional documents from team trump? >> not to my knowledge. not to the knowledge of the attorneys working on this case. the last communication, they came down in june. president trump met with them. said hello. very nice. the agents were nice. it was a nice meeting. and then after they saw the storage unit, they followed up with the washington d.c. lawyers and said we would like another lock on the storage unit. said sure, absolutely. that was done within two days of their trip down to mar-a-largo. after that, the next communication that any of us had heard was oh, we're going to raid the place. so there was nothing between hey, we'd like you to put this lock on the door and by the way, we're going to bust through this same look that we asked you to put on the door. >> sean: if you have top secret documents that are a national security threat, all the lawyers would have known about it. hey, we have documents that the doj wants back. you were there at mar-a-largo when the fbi raided the place. do you know what was in the boxes that they took? >> it was documents. that's all i know. you can look at the list. box a-1 isn't exactly descriptive. they searched three areas. the presidential office and the home and the storage area. they could have taken them from anywhere. we don't know where they took it from. so no, at this point we don't necessarily know what was in the boxes. i also think it's important to point out as you did earlier, president trump declassified everything. nothing was classified. if they had classification markings on that, doesn't mean they were classified. they had been declassified. the fact that they put the classification on the inventory to me was because they thought it would get out to the press, we want to make it public and they wanted somebody to say oh, look, he kept classified documents. none of it is classified. none of it. >> one last question for you, christina. this search warrant so broad. they could look for any piece of paper any any nook and cranny. they said they could go to melania's closet, go through her panty drawer. that's how broad this search warrant was. they could look at every personal item in the residence of the trumps, which is disgraceful. >> yeah, it is. they expect all of us now at this point as americans to just hold the fbi in such high regards that we say yes, of course, that's totally appropriate. for the same of law enforcement. i think they just got arrogant in their position and what they believe. acting like we have absolute power and can do whatever we want. the fact that they showed up at mar-a-largo shows that they have gotten way too comfortable with their power and it's about time the american people reign it in. >> sean: have you seen the affidavit to the warrant? >> no. it's remained sealed. we never got a copy of it. i would love to see it. >> sean: as would i. i think america wants to see that affidavit. thanks for the great work and thanks for joining me. >> thank you so much. >> sean: joining me now is mike davis, president of the article 3 project as well as chris swecker, former fbi assistant director. so mike, i want to play something that former obama ben rhodes hyped up the dangers of these documents being at mar-a-largo. take a watch. >> having documents in mar-a-largo is incredibly dangerous. you don't think mar-a-largo has been the target of every foreign intelligence service for years? doesn't look like a hard place to get inside, john, and walk around. these were in boxes, even if they're behind a locked door, it's not like they're not foreign adversaries that can get their hand on that information and learn importance things about our nuclear programs, intelligence. >> sean: mike, these are boxes at mar-a-largo. the secret service is on the premise at mar-a-largo. again, that's a severe risk to the american public. again, i'm going to ask this christina, by the hillary clinton server that we know any foreign entity could have accessed was not a threat? explain that to me. >> yeah, the president has constitutional authority as commander-in-chief to classify or declassify any record he wants nor any reason. he doesn't have to record it. that's his authority as confirmed by the supreme court in 1987, department of the navy versus eagan. every former president has an office of former president paid for by the president government. they got staff, they get office space. they get secure facilities or skiffs for classified materials. they get security clearances. they get secret service protection. these trump facilities are swept by the secret service for bugs. these are very secure documents. hillary clinton as secretary state had an insecure server with the nation's most classify secrets on it and there's evidence that may have been hacked by foreign governments. >> sean: to follow up on that, i have been in the skiff. i looked at documents in the skiff. you think i could have taken a document out of the skiff? no way. would donald trump be allowed to take documents out of the skiff that could get in boxes that ended up in mar-a-largo that russian or chinese agents will access? >> so as the president, he could take any record he wants. but they're in a box, paper records. they're photos, momentos in secure facilities in mar-a-largo. so there's no way that president trump violated the espionage act by declassifying these records and taking them with him. he was the president of the united states when he declassified them and they're safe in morgue, this is a political hit job by attorney general merrick garland and the biden justice department. >> sean: i'll come back to that in a second. chris, going to you. how serious are the statutes that were cited in this warrant? >> sean, these are heavyweight statutes. the first, 793 is basically the espionage statute. it talks about things that he may have done with the documents that would result in injury to this country and willful -- he did these things willfully that is serious enough that is a ten-year penalty if he's convicted. now, the third statute, which is the obstruction-related statute, carry as 20-year penalty and says that he alleges that he in somehow impeded an ongoing matter, which could have been the grand jury investigation of what we now know is an espionage case. so this is a much more serious case than just possession of classified documents. we were led to believe that this is all about just documents and arguing about how getting these documents back into the archives. far from it. they're alleging actions on the part of this ex-president and things that he has done that can only be coming from informants. >> sean: so mike, you talked about the classification issue what donald trump can declassify anything, specifically anything that he takes with him is declassified. explain. >> the president of the united states has inherent power under the constitution as commander-in-chief to declassify any record he wants for any reason he wants. he does not need to explain it. a sitting president can never violate the espionage act by declassifying records, by sending them to mar-a-largo or whatever. in 2012, president obama got caught on a hot mic whispering to the president of russia saying he needed time to get past the presidential election that he will have more breathing room to negotiate with russia. that is highly classified material, but president obama did not violate the espionage act by doing that because he is the president. >> sean: really good point. i forgot about that. thanks for bringing that up. mike and chris, thank you. president trump says he's been cooperating with the fbi to start. his attorney telling "the ingraham angle" that trump met with agents back in juan when they were at mar-a-largo and promised them anything that they needed. the raid came as a complete shock to the team trump. my next guest says the same situation happened to him. former trump white house adviser peter navarro said he cooperated with the fbi and days later he says they arrested him while at the airport. peter joins me now and the author of "taking back trump's america." a great book. peter, tell me what happened. i know you live in washington d.c., not that far from the fbi. you said you cooperated with them. what happened? >> very simple, sean. i have stood up for what is called executive privilege when the select committee came after me with a subpoena. i explained to them it was not my privilege to waive. they responded in the worst possible way with putting me in leg irons. it started june 3 in the morning. i was on my way to mike huckabee's show in nashville. i went to reagan airport, sat there an hour, boarded the plane. five armed fbi agents proceeded to surround me, deny me the right to call for legal advice. i wound up in handcuffs on the tarmac. off i went. it was funny. i'm literally a field goal kick away from the fbi headquarters. the normal protocol, sean, is for -- to come and do a voluntary arrest. i wind up in a solitary confinement cell that they had put john hinkley in when he shot ronald reagan. the bigger picture here for my, sean, this two-tiered system of justice. bill belichick said you are what your record is. merrick garland and the fbi's record is this. they put me in leg irons, they want me in prison and they raided mar-a-largo, the treasure of mar-a-largo. in both cases, it was totally unnecessary. it's political partisan circus. the people of america i think by this -- we're act a week into into this now with president trump and i still have any trouble. what people want know, what do we do about this? for me, my mission of taking back trump's america book mission is to win the house of representatives back first from pelosi. because it all starts with them. all starts with that select committee, the legal weapons, violation of separation of powers. these are things i'm standing up for in court to preserve. we get that done and the other thing is to get trump back in the white house. folks, get focused on november. we have a big election on tuesday in wyoming that i think is going to be definitive as well. >> sean: and you would have turned yourself in to the fbi. the fbi could have walked a block away from your headquarters and arrested you. they waited until you left your residence and went to the airport to arrest you in public and they want us to believe that the fbi is not political. they wanted to see you in leg irons in public. it's unbelievable. msnbc tried to explain how really fair merrick garland is. watch. >> there's this on going investigation of the president's son in delaware. merrick garland has not shut down that investigation. he's allowed that u.s. attorney to continue with this investigation going forward. so the idea that merrick garland is trying to swing the doj this liberal direction is not lined up with the facts. >> sean: is it fair to say that the hunter biden investigation is a great example of why merrick garland is fair? >> if trump did what hunter biden did, he would be in guantanamo bay. i've said from the outset, they're out to get trump to prevent him from running. the search warrant itself, i looked into it. that part of the warrant says if you conceal, destroy or remove documents willfully, you can't run for office. there's your smoking gun in that warrant. and the willful definition the department of justice is taking so out of touch with supreme court doctrine. basically means if you find something that shouldn't have been there maybe, maybe they can prevent you from running for office. that's what they're trying to do, stop trump. >> sean: you're reading my mind here. that's what i'm going to talk about with my next guest. thanks for joining us. >> pleasure, sean. you did great as a congressman. great to see you tonight. >> sean: as you can see with this read, democrats are doing everything they can possible to get trump not to run in 2024. they think this is their golden ticket. but i've got news for them, it's not. we'll explain. that's coming up next.