thank you for watching. 96 days. others form to go in "the first 100". we look forward to joining you every night after that. what's going to be accomplished in the next few days? stay tuned. good night, everybody, . >> this is a fox news alert. a federal judge in fenton san francisco has struck down president trump's executive order targeting good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." so to deny federal funds to cities that actively resist immigration law and try and shield illegal aliens from deportation. now judge william work has blocked it. he calls it an illegal effort by the executive branch to dictate local policy. the ruling is a big win for now for the many mayors of liberal cities across the country who vowed to resist federal immigration enforcement. >> to congress, it is welcome. the action by president trump turned on the head upside down

what we stand for. >> the city will not be bullied by this administration. the executive orders are counted to our constitution and a threat to this city's values. become an executive order will not change how we enforce the law in new york city or how we do business on behalf of the people. >> i believe in our century city status. i think there were hundreds of mayors all over this country that are saying the same thing. and we stand united. >> tucker: said immigration order of the white house apparently violates the constitution. that's the position of the court and of these many mayors. what exactly does the constitution say about immigration? on the board of supervisors for santa clara county california which is a part in a loss and he joins us now. thanks for coming on. >> thank you. >> tucker: here's a statement that your county issued after this court order. a santa clara county's had a strong message the trump administration today but the county will continue to uphold

the u.s. constitution and protect the rights of all of its residents despite threats. what constitutional rights specifically are you upholding here? >> the executive order was riddled with constitutional problems according to judge orrick, it was a sweeping victory today. we can't hold people as a county without due process, without probable cause, without a warrant in a criminal jail for a civil violation. we knew that. that. president of united states can't usurp the powers of the united states congress and can interfere with local control by trying to coax people in counties by threatening to take away billions of dollars of federal funding. that's completely unrelated to his policy. when you packed a lot of that sponsor. let's go point by point here. does the constitution guarantee a right of illegal aliens to be here in the country? >> the constitution guarantees the right of all persons to due process regardless of status. that's pretty clear in a plain

reading of the constitution of the united states. >> do you believe that people in santa clara county who are here illegally have a right to be here? >> we don't do deportation here. we do criminal law, we do civil law, so the state of california allows us to do as a county. it's up to ice and homeland security to determine who is entitled to be here and who's not entitled to be here. we'll leave that up to them. >> what's your opinion? you all took issue with his executive order, he brought it to court, you're happy with the results, are celebrating it. do people in santa clara county california there illegally have a right to be there? yes or no. >> i'm telling you that when the president of the united states tells us to detain people without probable cause, without a warrant, without due process in a jail even though they do not have a criminal record, whether or not the president tells us to do that, the

violation of the constitution of the united states. were not going to do that. >> tucker: is not with the president is saying pretty saying uphold federal immigration law and there's going to be a consequence here. you're establishing the principle here that the government has no right to tell local government how to behave and can't can't punish them if they does it behave. would it be okay for the administration to pull federal funding. >> over not talking about desegregation of schools. were talking about present united states telling us to detain people in criminal jails so that they can detain him in there good and ready. and the federal courts of the last two or three years have told us that's unconstitutional. if told us if we do that, were subject to civil liability. there are several jurisdictions that have been successful. the present united states is saying i don't care the federal courts say, do it anyway.

i want you to do the secure communities program is what he calls it. a program that was dismantled by homeland security voluntarily last year and as president comes along and says do it anyway. >> tucker: this would be not the president routes will, but this is the law. these are federal immigration laws that were passed by congress. these are not regulations that the executive branch thought up. elected members of congress passed these laws and you're saying you don't have to follow them and you can't be punished. my only point is a very obvious one which is the federal government continuously tells local governments he got to follow the law or else will withhold funds. use it happen all the time and you're saying is no longer the case, we act on our conscience. >> this judge says you cannot coerce local vote government by withholding funds especially funds that are unrelated to the policy objectively that you're trying to achieve. that's what this president did. he is the president of the united states. as an executive orbiter. it wasn't directed at congress.

he had over 400 local cities and counties joined together saying this is usurpation of power. it violates the constitution of the united states, violates separation of powers. thank god for the judicial branch because we have an executive branch is trying to direct local governments when they're not empowered to do so. spare me the lecture because you just go over a fact that you're ignoring witches we just had eight years of this happening in. the obama administration threatened to withdraw federal funds from states that didn't go by his transgender bathroom policies. with that unconstitutional also? >> i'm here to tell you that in 2010, made a decision here along with cook county, two counties united states of america stood up to homeland security and eyes and said we are not going to hold people in unconstitutional manner despite whatever request you make. we've been vindicated. were not only vindicated today, been vindicated by every court looking at the issue.

>> and giving you an opportunity to give your editorial. at like you to answer my question is very simple one. the president being set here by a federal judge that states do not have to comply with federal law and can't be punished for not doing so. that is a major departure from where we've been for my whole lifetime. do you think the obama administration was right to threaten to withhold federal funds from states that in complied with transgender bathroom laws? that's a really simple question. >> am telling you this is the first president united states that's threatened with an executive order to withhold in our case $1.7 billion from us. some constitutional for him to try to wield that kind of power. the federal court agreed with us today. >> tucker: that's not true. >> the constitution of the united states, it is true. >> tucker: they said they'd withhold funds from indiana. for people who didn't obey the

55-mile an hour speed limit. your same because you don't like a law you don't have to comply with it but every other tax. america still has to send you money. so where does this come from? this is a brand-new thing. at least acknowledge that. >> doesn't matter what i say. the courts today acted. they said we already knew and what you should know that the constitution of the united states is a law of the land. it's paramount. whatever you're talking about with federal courts or agency rules. >> i'm talking about federal laws when you ignored them, does the federal government have a right to punish you? and you're saying no. what you're saying is basically california is its own country now and if that's the way you want to go, good luck defending your borders i guess would be my point. >> california leading the country in the right direction because were honoring the constitution of the united states and there's a whole bunch of people across the country that believe that, that are following our lead. were happy to be in the lead. we are happy to have one this case today. >> tucker: thanks for joining

us. so president obama made $400,000 a year as president. now he commands that much for a single speech. over at fox business revealed yesterday that obama will be paid 400 grand to speak at a conference put on by the red cross. just kidding but, by the wall street firm. quite the ship for the man who once said this. >> i did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of fatcat bankers on wall street. >> tucker: [laughs] but he left office in order to do that. they've become the party of the superrich? the mc, sr., advisor and he joins us now. obvious question, what could the former president possibly say a, that we haven't heard, b that would be worth 400 grand in our. >> tucker: actually a former dnc, sr., advisor, not current. >> tucker: and spirit. >> thank you very much.

let me be very clear. when we judge president obama in terms of what his record is on wall street, i think we should look to policies that he is past and that is the wall street reform, which is a key measure that range in the abuses of wall street to ensure that what happens to the economy never happens again. >> you fell right into my trap. i was going to wait to hit you with the facts until the end of the segment but here we go. under president obama will, the dow jones industrial average rose 140%. that did not benefit everyone equally in this country of 325 million. the top 1% share of income rose from 17% to 22%. other words, an overwhelming bulk of the wealth crated underneath president obama, this is to decry the campaigns. to crash while street is ridiculous. >> no one is saying that he crushed wall street but if you're saying that wall street

executives like the wall street reform legislation, have another thing coming. >> tucker: the big banks got bigger and the little banks got smaller. >> their publicans are unveiling a new legislation next week to repeal that piece of legislation which is backed by the wall street banks. it is a wish list for the wall street banks and severe asking which of the parties are for the wall street banks and which ones against, we are against. >> tucker: that's a top rate. someone in private equity working a regular job, >> he pays half that. there's something called carried interest. it's a loophole they left in for eight years. it allowed the richest people in our country to pay half the taxes you pay. >> was not going to fix that as a tax reform legislation. >> tucker: i'll be the first to bark about it. spilling should be parking about it right now because they put out the details of it. and it is a big wet kiss to the superrich, to the wealthy, the corporations who. >> tucker: how could it be

wider than the kiss that the obama administration gave? this was the whole point of the backlash by bernie sanders against the democratic party. do you know what the margin was from hillary clinton on nantucket? 24 to 29. the affluent in this country. i'm not against rich people at all. i'm saying the democratic party represents them in a way that never has. you shouldn't be surprised when obama gets 400 grand. >> not one, not to, not three, but five goldman sachs executives. the key senior post with the white house. it is a people that are actually writing economic policy for this administration. goldman sachs executives. so if you want to talk about which is the party that is pro-wall street, just look at the cabinet for donald trump. >> tucker: he's hard enough a lot of goldman people. private equity firms and hedge funds put a lot of money into this campaign. >> for hillary clinton, they put

in about $48 million. for donald trump, they donated $19,000 total. 19,000 to 48 million. so why don't we just acknowledge the reality, the exit polls prove there is been a massive shift in the last 20 years of the democratic party was the party of working people, and now it's provable with the numbers. >> it's provable with the policy. hillary clinton was the only candidate in the race that was for raining the abuses of wall street. donald trump was talking about busting wall street reform that was raining in. that's how we know. >> tucker: $400,000 for an hour. i'm not against people giving speeches for pay. i think it's great. the 400 grand an hour begs the question what exactly is he selling? >> you should ask president obama. let me be very clear.

from the very beginning -- >> tucker: you wouldn't care? >> what i care about is what policies you push while you were in office and obama was not a friend of wall street business executives. donald trump is. that is an objective fact. >> tucker: i think it's possible to argue that tax reform on the table will not be with the president campaigned on. we'll see. but you can argue that president obama did not do the bidding of wall street banks. they supported him overwhelmingly. >> otherwise we wouldn't see wall street reform on the books. the wall street ceos do not like which they have campaigned against in which the republican party which is in their pocket is looking to. >> tucker: wanted to give so much money to hillary clinton? >> i have no idea. they were so anti-to their interests. >> tucker: that's why they've made billions. they have no idea where the money is. because they're just stupid.

>> i have absolutely no idea. why do know that hillary clinton had the strongest platform to rein the abuses of wall street of any candidate running. >> tucker: were almost out of time and you're doing a robust job as always. let me ask you this. can you look right in the camera and say i'm totally fine with president obama taking $400,000 from cancer fitzgerald for a speech? >> in the camera. i am totally fine with the president of the united states passing wall street reform that reigns in the abuses of wall street. >> you just made the point clearer than i ever could. thanks for joining us. up next, president iran deal is looking worse with every new revelation. you thought it was appalling then. now we've learned obama agree to release international weapons technologies to get iran on board. that is not a hollow claim. that's facts. we'll act the democratic congressman whether the deal is still working. also despite controlling

congress, publicans are going to give president trump the border wall. member what he ran on? asking the republicans what is wrong with the wall. stay tuned. if you've tried every pill on the shelf to treat your tough nasal allergies... ...listen up. unlike pills that don't treat congestion, clarispray covers 100 percent of your nasal allergy symptoms. clarispray. from the makers of claritin.

gave us the power to turn this enemy into an ally? microsoft and its partners are using smart traps to capture mosquitoes and sequence their dna to fight disease. there are over 100 million pieces of dna in every sample. with the microsoft cloud,

we can analyze the data faster than ever before. if we can detect new viruses before they spread, we may someday prevent outbreaks before they begin.

>> tucker: the around it was hated by people from the very beginning and our new details are showing just how much this country gave up to get that dea deal. report by political reveals the obama administration released a couple of prisoners who had smuggled a military technology for the iranian regime and dropped arrest warrants for 14 wanted fugitives. in some cases, they prevented agile agents from apprehending people who are wanted or iranians. this outraged federal

prosecutors. our prisons california, he voted for the iran deal. he joins us now. thanks for coming on. >> congratulations on the new time. i hope you get to go to bed early now. that's a good call. >> tucker: you issued a statement when he went on board with the iran deal and you said this. after participating in classified briefings, asking tough questions of the obama administration, i've concluded it's the best thing we can get an effect. >> certainly that. >> tucker: so you weren't told in classified briefings presumably or in response to tough questions of the obama administration that we were releasing fugitives were smuggling military technology to terrorist regime. >> i didn't know about this part of the deal. i don't agree with everything that happened but being farther away from a nuclear iran is a good thing and that's where we are right now. >> tucker: but everyone would agree with that. the question is how do we get there. >> it's a former fbi agent missing. >> tucker: that we did nothing about. that aside, he said he didn't

know about this. this is not a small detail. this is politico's description. some of the prisoners released from the united states who were describe the president at the time as civilians charged with nonviolent offenses were threats to u.s. national security according they obama and administration's own justice department. would you have voted for it they had done that? >> not going to go back in time. what i know is that president trump has a nuclear threat north korea and if he has to deal with two nuclear threats today, that would be quite, located for all of us. i'm happy that he only has one nuclear threat. >> tucker: that's in two ways, dodging the question. going back to the iran deal, mitigated the iranian nuclear threat at the massive assumption. we don't other that's true at all. >> secretary of state tillerson last week said it congress that iran is in compliance. that went from being a three-month way from having a nuclear weapon to now they restarted the program and

violated all the agreements. >> tucker: we've been full before on a bipartisan basis. i want to get back to the question here, which is why do you think the obama people lie to you about this? >> i don't know if they lied to congress or lie to anyone. >> you don't vote on this in public. he probably took a lot of heat on this. >> i voted on taking nuclear weapons away from iran. and we are safer because of that. now we need to count on our allies. >> tucker: let's get really specific. in one case here according to politico, no one from the obama admits ration has denied this, as part of the deal, u.s. officials even dropped their demand for 10 million and a jury said the aerospace engineer legally proceed from iran in another case, the obama administration sorted federal attempts to apprehend fugitives. the exit got in the way of federal agencies to bring these people to justice. if you had known that, would you have voted for it? >> this is stuff i wasn't familiar with. they could've done a lot better job of working with the agents

in the department of justice lawyers were working on these cases. but at the end of the day, we are all safer. what we should do now -- go why are we safer? >> they are testing ballistic missiles. >> tucker: he got 27 months for fraudulently obtaining faa credentials. he was not an iranian american, he was an iranian national living in houston. why would someone like that get faa credentials illegally? more than two years in prison. why would do with adecco? >> if you think i'm going to defend iran, i'm going to defend the united states. >> tucker: you voted for it. why would adding a guy like that free make a safer? >> i don't agree with every part of the deal. i'm telling you right now are much safer because they don't have a nuclear weapon. we should make sure they're not assessing ballistics. >> tucker: i'm not saying your pro-iran, i'm not saying that at all. you are hoodwinked. you got lied to. you admitted you got lied to. you issued a statement saying i know the truth, i was briefed in

a confidential briefing for it i asked her questions these guys. but i didn't tell you the truth. they lied to you in every other member. i'm just wondering why you would defend that? >> there a different branch of government that has a really debate and focus on is acting details they brought a top line deal to us, and i thought from my constituents' sake, for a country's sake the sake of the world, let's take a nuclear weapon away from iran. >> tucker: would be cool for the trump administration to allow you in a similar way? >> they didn't misrepresent anything to me. >> tucker: the call these people civilians and said they were nonviolent offenses. they were a betting terrorism trying to get them into a terrorist state. in one case, to hezbollah. these are big questions. i don't think he would've voted for it like that. i think they shafted you in this. speak what i'm focused on right now is making sure that iran is not terrorizing the world. so the bipartisan angle that i and many other congress support that will make all of this more states if we take missile

capabilities. >> tucker: were all being more safe. you know this matter well. the details are what matter. you can say i making us safe but if i'm letting people who are smuggling missile technology into a terrorist state go free and i prevent the u.s. government from bringing others to justice, that's not the same as making america safe, is it can back >> just don't agree. i think our constituents wanted us to do everything to take weapons from iran. we did that. the secretary of state certified that that is right now. you may not agree with the prisoner release, but at the end of the day you want to be at war with iran right now? >> tucker: nobody does. nobody wants that country to have nuclear weapons. my point is this really simply. a lot of your constituents, some of them are democrat. this was not a partisanship. they look at dozens of this is a bad deal for the united states in a bad deal for israel. and you said i trust them. now you say politico hardly a

white right-wing oregon saying they lie to you and did things they never would do to you in daylight. >> i don't like they liked me. i think they could've handled this better with the fbi and just as lawyers, but at the end of the day the pick away as we are all safer. >> tucker: so details don't matter. the trump people. >> only want them looking over that. >> tucker: will will bring you the very latest from america's corrupt and decaying media establishment. gooden news is, the news is abusing itself. an editor at "the huffington post" has resigned after she aggressively defended a fake opinion column, a fake one. recently the south african branch published a piece called could it be time to deny white men the franchise, the vote? the readers called out the article as absurd and discriminatory on its face. the editor-in-chief defended the

piece. she said the articles argument for standard feminist theory. it turned out the piece was an elaborate hoax by a white male professor. now the editor-in-chief has resigned in disgrace and the company has omitted the article was hugely damaging to his already damaged reputation. it didn't end there. several media figures and academics have predictably already jumped to the editors defense saying her resignation was itself racist because she is a south asian woman and a white male kept his job. so the revolution continues to eat itself. coming up next, germany is taking in a record number of immigrants and now they're saying record amounts of crime. who could possibly have seen the connection there? is there a fix? that's next.

and the wolf huffed and puffed... like you do sometimes, grandpa? well, when you have copd, it can be hard to breathe. it can be hard to get air out,

which can make it hard to get air in. so i talked to my doctor. she said... symbicort could help you breathe better, starting within 5 minutes. symbicort doesn't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden symptoms. symbicort helps provide significant improvement of your lung function. symbicort is for copd, including chronic bronchitis and emphysema. it should not be taken more than twice a day. symbicort contains formoterol. medicines like formoterol increase the risk of death from asthma problems. symbicort may increase your risk of lung infections, osteoporosis, and some eye problems. you should tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. symbicort could mean a day with better breathing. watch out, piggies! (child giggles) symbicort. breathe better starting within 5 minutes. get symbicort free for up to one year. visit saveonsymbicort.com today to learn more.

>> tucker: time for tonight's reality check.

in the past five years, germany has taken in a staggering number of migrants for company to the back country its size. a silent applicants rose from 172,241,000 all the way up to 722,000. who would've thought that all those migrants are having a big effect on the crime rate back if you thought it, give yourself a star. according to the interior ministry of germany from 2014 to 16, the number of migrant criminal suspects have tripled to more than 174,000 them. is there a lesson here or should? will just pretend it's not happening. executive vice president for the center of security policies and he joins us here tonight. it is number surprise you? >> not in the slightest. they horrify me. when you take in massive numbers of people who don't speak the language, don't have a lot of education, don't have relevant job skills, you got a problem. you stare when the cultural and religious problem with disrespect and degradation of women then you have a crisis. there when the jihadists, then you have a nightmare and that's

what germany is dealing with. they have all of those things going on. >> tucker: if you bring in people from other countries and cultures who speak different languages, the first order of business is assimilation. bringing them in, making them part of your culture, making them one of you. is germany trying to do that? >> not the slightest and they can't. they have a difficulty because the mosques and cultural centers are telling them not to assimilate. the saudi's offered to fund a 200 mosques for the syrian refugees there. that's like a jihadist starter kit. they have the most extreme preachers and mosques in the world so there a problem. there is no assimilation. there is no basically any dealing with the culture of germany in a meaningful way, and they've got a lot of young males who are problem on a good day. >> tucker: germany is one of the richest countries in the world, the economic engine of europe, what would they do this? >> if the euro kratz. it's that pc mentality that says we want to make the world a better place. i share that. i want to help people who are in trouble.

if that doesn't mean you should uproot them, but the move and bring all of them to a country where they don't have the ability to fit in. right now, you got 50% of german women saying they're scared to go out at night alone. that's a problem. even the 50% rise in crime stats is an artificially low number they because the are being told to minimize the number of crimes they report that emigrant related. they are kratz don't want the results of their insane policies exposed. the bad situation. >> tucker: what your describing there is masochism. a country that wants to hurt itself. >> or that feels guilty. there's a concept of liberal guilt where they want to wear that hair sure and make things better because they feel bad about what they have. i think angela merkel is a perfect example of that and the ruling class in germany wants to make up for bad things in their past, was to do the right thing because they're good liberals and progressives. in this case, what they think is the right thing is an awful thing. for them, for france, for the

scandinavian countries, there was one to hold out as an example of how to have a social democracy. it doesn't work. >> tucker: at some point, ordinary germans are going to say were we had this great company that was functioning a cozies of and is being destroyed. what you're going to see them and as it is with sadness as a resurgence in german nationalism. ugly german nationalism. >> that's just it. in some cases, it's horrible to think of but can you blame them when their women are being assault on new year's eve were so disgraceful and the way the police tried to hide it and the bearcats tried to hide it and pretend it wasn't as bad as it was, at that had happen here, you'd have the same problem. i don't think you can blame it happens. hopefully it won't be the evil kind of horrifying-like thing. >> tucker: you certainly hope not. that would be terrible for the world. but if you want to create that, if you wanted to bring that back on exactly what you would do. >> let's hope they learn from the fact that now they have a crime wave of their own creation

and at this point, france will. they had slow down the immigration platform. that could happen in germany to and may be due in a more measured pace. they betake the of the refugees where they are. what if you stop the bad days in syria and make that a decent place to live again? that's a concept. >> tucker: thanks a lot. in germany struggles with a long-term effect of integration, the american congress can't agree on how to control our borders despite public and controlling the congress, they are widely expected to leave out funding for president trump's opposed border wall and a spending bill that has to pass this week to keep the government from shutting down. if republicans won't back the law, what is next for immigration? rep is a state of north carolina, he opposes the wall and is trying to hammer out an immigration plan he hopes to get bipartisan support. he joins us here on the set. thanks for coming on. >> glad to be here.

by the way, i don't oppose the wall. >> tucker: you don't. >> i oppose putting a 30-foot structure on top of a 3,000-foot sheer cliff. i oppose taking down to fences that are separated with a all weather border patrol in california that's working in. i oppose things that the people on the ground think are not in their best interests and those of the folks that go out and put on the bulletproof vest every day and have to actually protect the border who tell me that the wall in certain places makes sense but intelligence, reconnaissance, and other structures make sense elsewhere. it's a common sense. >> tucker: i'm totally for the border patrol. i have a hard job and i admire them but they don't get to make the policies. you do. >> consultation with the homeland secretary, general kelly who was the head of southern command who also says that we need a infrastructure or approach to securing the border. the way countries like israel, who i would think most people

would tend to agree have some really bad actors on the other side of not just the wall but fences, walls weren't appropriate and a combination of structures that make the most sense for the people who have the job of protecting the border. >> tucker: but the people voted for a while. president trump got a lot of votes in your state, million more votes he got in 2016, a different cycle but people endorse the wall. >> what sense would it make to take down a structure that's working and replace it with something that the people on the ground think wouldn't? >> tucker: you wouldn't want to replace a wall with a wall. so what percentage of the southern border do you think should have the wall? >> i think it depends on the geography. whether or not you put a wall on the rio grande would depend on of factors, but it could take decades because of all the property rights and condemnations we have to do to accomplish it. there's a lot of private property owners there. so doesn't make sense they are? in some cases, absolutely. if you go around the rio grande valley, they are very clearly places where a wall of the structure would create hedge

points that other technologies could be used. >> tucker: i think it's a fair question for voters. i voted for this guy, he promised a beautiful wall. >> the border is about 2,000 miles. let california sector seems to be working the way it is. it's probably a combination that would go in arizona and the west texas, new mexico sector. and then a slightly different -- the exact number of actually asked for, where is the geography in migration patterns make sense connect doesn't make sense to put a large structure in a place that is really a badlands where isr may be a better way to do it. >> tucker: you don't want any border wall in california. >> if it makes sense, but the fence is working. the problem that we have there is actually something that a wall won't fix. and that's tunnels. are we going to use a different technology to find out how they've gotten around it? the other thing our sightlines. this is very important point. if i remove all the sightlines and i can't see when the bad

actors are coming. if i have a 30-foot structure and don't have intelligence and reconnaissance, then i only have a section between a bad actor and a border patrol person that can't see what they're about to say. >> tucker: why can't you do both? the long-term question is there's going to be a democratic congress at some point and border controls that are easy to pull back with personnel for example can be pulled back pretty quickly by noon ministrations or new congresses. why not build something permanent and create security for generations? >> in part because i don't know if it's the most productive use of the money that were going to have. we also to understand the border and, i was in laredo, one of the bridges there. the border patrol agent said that they see 30 kilograms of methamphetamine every 48 hours. 300,000 doses of methamphetamine and they say they're only interdicting maybe ten or 15% of all the drugs that are coming across. i'd rather spend the money we have no one helping them seize more of those drugs and secure

the border and we have to fight the political fight but i think if we secure the border, the american people will be behind keeping that. >> tucker: why do we give amnesty to anybody? according to "wall street journal," you're proposing temporary legal status to people brought to this company illegally by their parents before completing. >> ronald reagan is someone i know you had a lot of respect for pretty at a catastrophic failure in granting amnesty in 1986 to 3 million people. amnesty is proven not to work. it grows the problem. what we're trying to do is how to stabilize the problem, secure the borders of the problem can't grow anymore. stabilize the problem by giving some sort of temporary protective status that does not provide a passive citizenship, does not provide any fast pass to citizenship. we solve the problem. otherwise were going to be here. >> tucker: why would you do that? why would the priority not to be to make certain that we control borders, which we don't. >> that should be the priority. >> tucker: why would you before you enforce verified, which is a pretty great way to

stop people from hiring illegally. >> it's actually passed the verified speaker of the house. we had the verified mandate about four or five years ago. he he verified to be the law of the land. absolutely. they have to go in tandem. imagine, there are a lot of people who are abusing the visa systems that we have today. we need to make an example out of the people who are abusing it. the expense of the people who have a legitimate need. >> tucker: why would we provide any kind of amnesty to anybody before enforcing those back >> i think it's a matter of how you stabilize things and then come up with strategies for dealing with the illegally present? people who think that we can all of a sudden round up 11 million or 14 million, how many there are and mass deport them, i don't think that's going to work. >> tucker: no one suggesting that. >> i agree and we should. >> tucker: at the same time, i don't understand --

>> verify on a national basis that you have a basis for enforcing that with employers to knowingly hire illegally present people. >> tucker: i don't see why you would do that intended with given people average amnesty. >> the biggest problem is republicans and democrats talking about solving this problem for 40 years and they've all failed. i think the thing that we haven't done is paired up things that would get support from the other side of the aisle with law enforcement measures. increased enforcement for bad actors for people who are abusing visa policies. these are the things where there's a consequence for not following a reform process that can work, it's not permanent and people that think that i've proposed something to read a bill i haven't written yet. but i am proposing actually being a congress at a party that solves the problem versus being the latest generation of people who promise to never deliver. >> tucker: things for joining us. >> thank you. >> tucker: time for another installment of news abuse because the media i now so abusive that one segment night is not enough.

in recent coverage of the genital mutilation case in the state of michigan, "new york times" and now refusing to call the crime what it is. instead of calling it mutilation which it is, the times is referring to it as quote genital cutting. the health and science editor of the newspaper said she uses that euphemism because the term genital mutilation is culturally loaded. in other words, it's an unjust imposition of the western norm and that young girls is bad, and possibly the superior norms of societies that do that is necessary. one wonders what other culturally loaded terms "the new york times" will use in the future. they be as it attacks on a modest woman will become corrective application of corrosive chemicals. driving a truck into a christmas market would be racism induced vehicle acceleration. of course, islam remains of religion of peace. up ahead, the u.s. has dispatched a nuclear summer into south korea and president trump summoning an entire senate with a special briefing the north korean press.

the president's attitude on north korea the right approach? a dangerous gamble. brit hume next. the dna day sale is here. get your ancestrydna kit. spit. mail it in. learn about you and the people and places that led to you. go explore your roots. take a walk through the past. meet new relatives. and see how a place and its people are all a part of you. ancestrydna. save 20% through wednesday at ancestrydna.com ♪

♪ i'm dr. kelsey mcneely and some day you might be calling me an energy farmer. ♪ energy lives here.

>> tucker: democrats believe this so strongly or pretend they do that many will argue strenuously against taking any steps to protect against voter fraud because again, doesn't even exist. someone finally decided to check on that question, not a just released by north carolina's bipartisan board of elections. from that of 4.8 million votes cast in that state, at least 530 be fraudulent. mostly with former convicted felons. dozens more voted despite being citizens, a handful were caught

impersonating other people. that's 580 votes, doesn't sound like a lot until you remember major elections have turned on fewer votes than that. and 40 for example in 2,000, the same level of voter fraud is north carolina taken place, but a hundred votes proportionally. george w. bush won that state by 537 votes. so does matter. democrats probably know the first place in a position on it. north korea has been sending violent threats are way for years, but nothing seemed closer than ever to provoking a response. u.s. has dispatched a nuclear submarine uss michigan in a show of force while the trump administration taking the exceptional step of inviting everything a u.s. senator to a briefing on the korean threat. the right moves or things getting out of hand, can we do about them? fox news senior political analyst brit hume joins us now. it seems like the intensity here

is increasing to what looks like a dangerous level. that your perception? >> i think that is a dangerous level mostly because it appears that north korea is now closer than ever to putting together a nuclear weapon that they have the ability to deliver even to the west coast of the united states. obviously the threat is real and it's reasonable. but i think there are some issues that have to do with the perception of the north korean regime that may need to be adjusted. for example, it is sort of commonly thought that the leader of north korea kim jong-un as donald trump would put it, a crazy fat guy. i don't think he is crazy. i don't think his predecessor was crazy nor his predecessor. it seems to me they have been very shrewd indeed at scaring the daylights out of our allies in the region and the rural community as it sometimes called and thereby been able to pursue their nuclear ambitions apace

while constructing concession after concession and deal after deal with the west in which they basically come out ahead. >> tucker: so your argument is there predictable, which seems right to me. it's not easy to hold onto power in a dictatorship like that. he knows what he's doing on some level. what do they want? and how can we realistically stop this from getting to nuclear war? >> i don't think they want to nuclear war they don't want to stop one. they have a dysfunctional economy, dysfunctional society. their obvious the vulnerable, and what they wanted to continue along their state ways, continue to build their military arsenal, continue to scare their neighbors, support in china which is what any big company do not would be countless refugees pouring across the chinese border and so on. if they can continue to do that

who, they would be able to survive and they have now for at least three generations. it's worth remembering that between the late 1950s and 1991, the united states and nuclear weapons, tactical nuclear weapons in south korea to defend the south against the possibility of military onslaught from the north. everyone seems to believe the north is fully capable of mounting inflicting unspeakable damage on south korea and particularly on the capital they are soul. that's been the linchpin of the dilemma about north korea. we and our allies would win any war against them but in the whole course of it, would inflict unsustainable damage on our principal allies in the region. it's been a very effective point of blackmail and hence it seems by the notion that the leaders of their are nutty. >> tucker: that got us in a hammerlock. so really quickly, do you think calling all the senators over to

a meeting with the president is that what purpose does that serve? >> it seems to me that it may be a tool by which to get members to understand the threat and therefore the basis of the administrations action, which seems to me at this point would be sensible which is to say you press china's best you can to intervene there and do what china can, which a lot of people believe is quite a lot since north korea -- since china is north korea's largest patron. to put north korea on notice, the military option against them is on the table. basically taking military actions off the table for a long time come put them back on, that might not work but it seems to me about the previous course we were on wasn't working either for sure. >> tucker: clearly not working. brit hume, thanks a lot for that. >> you bet, tucker. >> tucker: joins us and the

friend zone to tell us what it's like heading down tomorrow lago every weekend. stay tuned. brella that covers you part way, so when it comes to pain relievers, why put up with just part of a day? aleve, live whole not part. tell you what, i'll give it to you for half off.

there's nothing more than my vacation.me so when i need to book a hotel room, i want someone that makes it easy to find what i want. booking.com gets it. they offer free cancellation, in case i decide to go from kid-friendly to kid-free. now i can start relaxing even before the vacation begins. your vacation is very important. that's why booking.com makes finding

the right hotel for the right price easy. visit booking.com now to find out why we're booking.yeah ♪ >> tucker: time now for "the friend zone" ." we have kristin fisher. every week she flies down to mar-a-lago. you may see her down there. you may look upon her with envy and think well, kristin fisher is having a good time. she shares the dark side of palm beach. there are some perils involved in covering this. >> absolutely, every time you go to florida you have to be careful of some critters and wildlife. we deal with a lot of that but i want to start with our very first live shot location. we wanted to do it right near mar-a-lago obviously. this is the beautiful causeway en route to mar-a-lago.

the problem with that is there is nowhere to go to the bathroo bathroom. you are doing live shots every hour. you don't have time to go to the bathroom and come back. >> tucker: this is the most powerful news organization in the world. >> we looked into getting a porta-potty. it cost a bit more money than you might imagine. so since then, we have moved on to a new location. it is right near the hotel. it comes with its own set of challenges. this is the new one. what you are seeing, this umbrella we put up. we were sitting there without the umbrella. we are working on our next and we feel some wetness on us. we think it's a bit of rain. it was not a bird peeing on us. there's more volume. look down, there is some group on her shoe.

we look and there is a little turd about this big. it's from the massive iguana. >> tucker: that is gross. relieving themselves on you? >> we also had a poisonous caterpillar. in the middle of a live shot, do you see them right there? crawling on my shoulder. i didn't notice he was there. i guarantee you i probably would have screamed. greg gutfeld caught it and of course, he aired a segment on it on the five. >> tucker: do you ever ask yourself how greg gutfeld caught that? that's a pretty close view of the live shot. did not make you uncomfortable? >> no.

>> tucker: do you ever go into the club? >> are unless you are a part of the travel pool, no. you are forced to stay outside. >> tucker: wow. is it fun? >> it's really fun. >> it's a dream assignment. i've wanted to cover the white house. this presidency is just so unpredictable. there's never been anything like it. >> tucker: little did you know it would be in palm beach. you have added a whole new dimension. >> you never know what is going to beyond me. caterpillar, iguana. >> tucker: that is it for us tonight. tune in every night at 8:00 to the show that is still sworn enemy of lying, pomposity,

smugness and groupthink. you can see "the five" getting ready. they are live from new york city. "the five" is next. >> thank you, tucker. i am jesse watters along with kimberly guilfoyle, bob beckel, dana perino and greg gutfeld. it's 9:00 in new york city and this is "the five" ." the showdown over the right to free speech is intensifying tonight. and coulter vowed to deliver a speech at uc berkeley on thursday even after the school pulled off her scheduled visit. a group of students have filed a lawsuit against the university for canceling the event. a riot erupted over a