>> sean: i really needed that. have something to say? nice, mean, it doesn't matter. call the number on your screen. we'll see you back here tomorrow night. thanks for being with tucker carlson is up next. ♪ ♪ >> tucker: well, good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." america, the country is as divided as it has been in 150 years since the civil war. right in right and left different cultures rarely encounter each other personally. they live in different cities, attend different churches, read different books, have different hobbies. they even eat different foods increasingly. at the political level state and local governments don't just denounce federal policy they actively defy it 8 states ignore federal ban on marijuana letting cities grow it impunity. countless city tell their police immigration laws don't exist or invalid or so

immoral you can't k. ignore them. can key salvage a functional nation out two of groups who increasingly despise each other. a real question and not asked enough. joining us is mark green a former new york city public advocate. he recently founded a shadow cabinet. a group of policy experts who oppose every action of the trump administration. he joins us now. mark, thanks a lot for coming on. >> thank you and congratulations. >> tucker: thank you. >> you have led my career go which is talent plus luck. i'm working on both. but you got it. >> tucker: thank you. i have known you for a long time and i don't agree with your politics but i think you are smart and thoughtful. i wanted to talk to you about this specifically there are always debates between the states and the federal government on to who ought to -- about who ought to have authority. and that is the tension and then there is a separation of powers, which is also a legitimate tension and long-standing. what you seeing now seems different. profoundly so. california among them. don't recognize federal authority in important ways. no matter what side you are on, that looks like the

first couple of steps towards permanent division. >> well, i completely agree with your opening comment that we have not been as politically and culturally divided since the civil war. but, you blame the framers. as you implied. they built in a disz persian, not a concentration of power between state and federal where had you to fight it out often on particular issues. and then, of course, three branches of government, but right now we have one party controlling all three branches in a sense. but when you say both parties kind of have been doing this, what's different is not that -- you know, look, the country is divided on marijuana legalization. they were against it 20 years ago. now they are slightly for it. i can understand states vying. tucker, we have changed roles. of course, under obama federal overreach got to stop it the 10th amendment. enough to we have states saying no, no, no.

we have to stop president trump from overreaching when it comes to a muslim ban that he said wasn't but every judge has said is. and every time he is in court, he appears to lose and then bluster an attack the judiciary. sore loser. >> tucker: okay, i get the rhetorical point you are making. here is what is different than what we have seen in previous generations. these are issues that are not being fought out and argued over and not being debated in the congress which is where they ought to be. if you don't like the federal ban on possession of marijuana, change the law. have you got representatives and senators change a law enforcement lead a crusade to do. so that's not what is happening. the states are saying i don't see your authority. i'm doing what i want. that hasn't happened since the civil war. one of the things that precipitated the civil war. i would think as a student american history you would see the consequences potentially in doing it again. >> of course, nothing is like slavery. you will admit that let's take the modern examples.

it's not that democrats in california or elsewhere soh, wer own way. sorry. the judges who nearly unanimously ruled against trump's muslim travel ban one and two cited him as the source being that you can legislate. can you have tighten the borders to keep us safe. but a president can't say it's based on religion and say it's not. that's why he lost. >> tucker: you are arguing the legal case which is a separate argument and i think i can probably crush new that argument. that's not what we're debating now. what we're debating now. >> justice carlson. you lost in court. maybe you could win in this court. >> tucker: what we are debating now, however, is the behavior of states and municipalities that are saying not judges, but elected officials, politicians who are saying i just don't acknowledge the validity of your law. the power of your law. that's what they are saying. sachings area city saying to the federal government of laws passed on bipartisan basis in washington and congress as they are supposed to be, i'm just not

acknowledging that that hasn't happened. >> it happens all the time. constitutional law professor larry tribe of harvard is among us in the shadowing trump. and several months ago he wrote, look, sanctuary cities the regulation that trump has imposed saying we are going to fine you anticrime moneys unless you assist news convicting people who are here allegedly illegally. they are saying you are going to lose that case. you can't coerce a locality to do something unlawful based on money from another program. the judge agreed with him. tucker, one more point. >> tucker: i don't want. >> i don't want to get in the lead. >> tucker: you are. you are ignoring my point. not talking about the ruling of judges. federal politicians saying federal law doesn't apply to me because it's immoral. that's something recent precedent. >> the refugee ban isn't because it's immoral. nobody can say that it's because the president used a religious test. >> tucker: again, you are arguing a parallel and

different case. i'm saying that mayors who say we are sanctuary city in contravention of federal law are basically saying we are our own country, why are not subject to the laws -- >> -- they don't say that you are exaggerating for effect. here is what is going on that is radical, forgive me. trump is, of course, legally the president, temperature kesse of the electoral college favoring rural states to get the constitutional convention passed and comey and putin. >> tucker: come on. you are smarter than that. >> he is legally the president. but he is such a blustering demagogue who utters these complicities and he says oh, i'm right. really? let's see what the courts say. so one third less popular than any other president. so when locals say. >> you are putting on display the problem itself. you are not actually engaging with the core question which is can california behave like its own country without consequence? >> that's a political

statement. they are not behaving as their own country. >> tucker: yes they are. >> two judges said those two bans are illegal. you want to ignore that we have radical extremist put who is hated by a majority of the public and guess what? democrats you. >> tucker: certainly hated by you. >> turn out to the streets and in court and in congress and making a difference. >> tucker: let me ask you a question. i want to ask you something that a lot. >> i have heard a lot of what you have said a lot of times too. be original. >> tucker: we are letting in more immigrants and have more immigrants than any other country admitted in history. i'm not saying that's bad. i am saying it's a source potentially of division. how should we assimilate those people? newcomers to america should be taught what in order to make them american? what? the language, history, religion? >> require that they watch msnbc and fox. look, tucker, you know that

you the rate of crime among refugees into this country. >> tucker: that's not what i'm saying. >> include syrians less than of domestic. >> tucker: you are missing the question. >> you always say that. >> tucker: the question is. >> you implying we are being overrun. trump campaigned to 600 million. >> tucker: i'm saying countries which have people who live in the country have nothing in common break apart. real thing. more people less in common than any time in history. what are we going to do about that. >> tucker, has there ever been a president ever as divisive as donald trump who attacks the media as enemies of the people and well, yes or no? and so that's why. >> tucker: trump has had a bad effect on some people and i would put new that category. >> is he a divider. >> tucker: you don't like trump. thank you for joining us. >> i will @ shadowing trump. i will think about it. >> tucker: riot police

standing by now where conservative author ann coulter was supposed to give a speech today. if you want proof that america is hurdling toward real division over ideas and culture, look no further than what you are looking at right now. left wing students and activists made perfectly clear they are incapable of coexisting with alternative views. rear when myel mile when milo as happened? >> tucker: this week ann coulter forced to cancel a speech because the school

would not provide a venue or time and it was too unsafe. can you tell it's not exaggeration looking at pictures. hundred threads of people have taken to the streets anyway. riot police are out in force to keep the situation in control. ann coulter is in san francisco and joins us live. there has been a lot written about this. why were you not able to speak at berkeley? >> well, they changed, you know, the rules every 10 minutes. i kept agreeing to all of their conditions. they were hoping i would cancel. but no matter how, you know, i would give it from a hot air balloon. at 3:00 in the morning and i kept saying okay, okay, whatever you want. and then they just up and cancelled it and then they randomly rescheduled it. and then my ally turned tail and ran at the last minute when i think we were about to achieve total victory. >> tucker: my understanding.

>> i didn't have any sponsors. i didn't have berkeley. >> tucker: your sponsors. >> berkeley cancelled, my sponsored acquiesced. >> tucker: is it fair to say bottom line that the threat of violence is what prevented you from speaking? >> well, that's what berkeley claimed. of course, you know, there are ways of dealing with violence. that's why we have a police force. that insane press conference that berkeley administrators and captain alex yah i think his name was with the berkeley police last week. the police captain's argument was we can't have ann coulter. there's going to be violence. i don't know, call a cop. what's your job? it's like getting on a plane that's about to take off and the pilot says how am i supposed to get this thing across the country? that's your job. the police were told to stand down. >> tucker: protect your right to say what you think. what would have you have said? i guess it's too late now.

you have got a venue right here. what would you have said had you been allowed to speak? >> well, yes, you are getting it exclusively so that the thugs do not win. well, my seditious and hateful speech, the theme of it was going to be obviously it was going to be searingly brilliant speech on immigration. but the main point of which was federal written law on the books about immigration developed over generations by both democrats and republicans should be enforced. >> tucker: huh. that was it? >> >> well, that was the overall theme, yes. you should enforce them. >> tucker: i agree with you emphatically that you weren't going to call for war or violence or anything like that. you were going to say existing laws ought to be enforced. >> ought to be enforced. yes. i might have a little -- it's topical to this week. i started a tweet today that i will be sending out every morning as we watch the progress. the border wall update. number of miles built today,

zero. number of miles built since trump's inauguration zero. look for the next update tomorrow. i mean, i'm a little annoyed. this was the campaign promise that shook up the political world. you would think, if you were someone like paul ryan, after spending the entire trump campaign trying to undermine trump and still to have him elected and be elected in a pretty stunning victory, winning wisconsin, paul ryan's home state. something republicans haven't won for 20 years, including when, ah-ha paul ryan from wisconsin was on the ticket. you would think the day after november 8eth, so november 9th paul ryan says i don't think i will go for my four hour weight lifting campaign today. i will start working on the signature promise that just won donald trump the election and not wait until april 7th to say to the president of the united states we will have to drop funding for the wall because we don't want a government shutdown, when of course, as

i wrote in my column this week, they are not funding a wall to avoid a government shut down? not having a wall is the definition of a government shut down. the basic purpose of government is to keep us safe. if we can't protect our borders, i would say that's a government shut down. >> tucker: yeah it, does seem like a pretty basic function of government. ann coulter. you always have a place to talk here. thanks for joining us. >> thank you. >> tucker: something brand new appears to be going on with free speech on campus and in the country. is it new? joined now with somebody with actual perspective author and columnist thawk. charles, when you were in the middle of something like this and things do seem to be going crazy, the question is this really a new thing? i have never seen anything like this. >> i mean, we saw some of it in the 1960's when the university administrators would cave in, a famous case at cornell. some radical students carrying guns by and large

administrations were supine. basically still are thugs threatening violence. basically fascist gangs can shut down free speech. >> tucker: yes. >> you talked about how we're fundamentally divided in ways even down to the foods we eat and what we read. but the one thing that used to unite left and right, even in the bitterest times in the 50's, mccarthyism, people would say things like liberals would say i don't believe, i don't support anything you say, but i will defend your right to say it that was a cliche. and it almost became something that you would -- i mean it was so obvious that you could mock it. >> where has that gone? if you can't have the government guaranteeing the safety of speakers, then we have lost the -- one of the fundamental uniting elements of our society. if there is anything that unites us is believe in the first amendment. believe in free speech. whenever you talk about

america, what makes us unique we believe in liberty. it begins with religious liberty and it also begins with free speech. and if you can't get agreement on defending that, i mean, the obligation of any authority right now is to say ann coulter can speak. and we will protect her. that's why you pay your taxes. that's why we have a police. and we are not going to allow a gang of thugs really fascist gangs. this is how it started in europe in the 1920s and 1930s. fascist gangs would literally intimidate their opponents to the point where they became dominant. i don't think they are going to take over. this is not mussolini. none the less, it is very disturbing that in america somebody cannot speak because there are thugs who threaten violence. >> tucker: i agree with that completely. i started reading you when i was a kid liberal magazine the new republic. everything would agree what you just said. where are the not

necessarily the writers but the reasonabled principled left to defend ann coulter's right to speak. >> after your first segment with mark green. mark scree green is a very smart guy. >> tucker: yes, he. >> he has run 60 times for mayor and lost. that happens to the best of them. but, i mean, he was completely -- he was pretending that we don't really have a president. because he detests it. he is a divider. i don't like him so i don't have to respect his authority. this is nuts. this doesn't happen. this is a poisoning. and i think it's a sign decadence. if the left will not stand up for the elementary principles we have a president. he is elected. he has a authority. legitimate authority. and we proceed from there, we have free speech. you should be able to speak and not be shut down. if we can't get agreement on those principles, then we really are in a dangerous situation. and it is, i think, a manifestation of decadence

of a civilization that doesn't have enough confidence in its own righteousness. in the end are for all of our flaws, if you don't have that kind of civilizational consciousness, you are finished. >> tucker: i agree with you 100 percent. i was hoping you were going to make me feel better. you didn't but you did explain that thank you. >> you are feeling really bad, i'm still a licensed psychiatrist. i'm happy to write you a prescription for anti-depressants. >> tucker: only person i would take pills from doctor, thank you. in the last year and a half ms-13 is believed to have murdered 8 high school kids in long island alone. up next, talk about what's needed to destroy the deadliest gang in america. also the actor tim daily is lobbying for more taxpayer dollars to be spent on the arts. he joins us in a minute to explain why we should keep doing that. ♪

boost. it's about moving forward, not back. it's looking up, not down. it's being in motion. boost® high protein it's intelligent nutrition with 15 grams of protein and 26 vitamins and minerals. boost® the number one high protein complete nutritional drink. with tempur-pedic.t our proprietary material automatically adjusts to your weight, shape and temperature. so you sleep deeply, and wake up feeling powerful. find your exclusive retailer at tempurpedic.com

>> president trump the justice department has zero tolerance for gang violence. transnational criminal like ms-3 represent one of the gravest threats to our american safety. if you are a gang member, we will find you. we will devastate your networks. we will starve your revenue sources, deplete your ranks. and seize your property of profits. >> tucker: that's attorney general jeff sessions vowing to take many prisoners in crackdown of m-13 the street gang. tomorrow the attorney general will be visiting long island new york where the street gang is accused of murdering 8 high school students in the last 18 months. several state police will be joining fbi task force fighting that gang. steve levy is a form are county executive for suffolk

county who has been there for a while he knows a lot about m 1-13. he joins us tonight: the first question really is why now? ms-13 as we discussed before is not a new phenomenon. where was the federal government three years ago? >> well, the federal government three years ago was allowing tens of thousands, scores of thousands of unaccompanied minors to come over the southern border and then started allocating them throughout the nation, 4,000 of whom were settled in communities on long island. and many of us warned back then this is a major mistake. who thinks it's a good idea out there that you are going to have 4,000 young people without parents going in to a community and that's going to be good either from a financial or a safety perspective. and we now have 12 young people dead over the last year. not only because of that, but for other reasons that

have been total failures. change now in the administration. attorney general is very serious about enforcing our borders and trying to crack these gangs. they can't do it alone. they need help from the locals. >> what you just said. i guess i'm sitting here kind of in awe. the idea that you would move a lot of unaccompanied teenagers into tight concentration clusters and kind of hope for the best seems demented. did anybody at the time say wait a second common sense suggests this is a bad idea. >> oh, so many of us did. we warned that these kind of things would happen. but, again, it was political correctness run amuck. now you have the attorney general coming in and say would he go have to try to deal with this. you know, of the 13 people who were collared by local officials, local police for these crimes in the last year, 10 of them are undocumented seven of them came here through unaccompanied minor program. so the attorney general's to do something about it now,

you need local. five years ago they said they no longer wanted to work with the fbi in dealing with gangs. it was a disaster. it allowed for ms-13 to reconstitute itself. fortunately that heinous policy has been reversed but a lot of damage was done. they are talking about meeting up with the attorney general tomorrow and giving him a laundry list of various brams they wanted funded. okay, fine. tucker, we have no headache sure we don't have so much sociology 101 that we forget law enforcement 101. the first list they should give to the attorney general is a list that every criminal illegal alien presently incarcerated and challenge him to be deported if they commit a violent crime upon their term ending and come back five years and find all the other gang members incarcerated and get them out of here too if they're here illegally. >> liberals are the very

favorable of data except if it applies to immigration. they don't keep track absolutely immoral to do that. last question e we tend to gauge the destructiveness of the group ms 13 by murder rate because it's the easiest to keep track of. there has to be a lot of other effects. if you live in sufficient fox county and have gang activity in your neighborhood. what does that mean for you? >> parents, students, they're terrified. these gangs take control over the schools. they threaten families. it's quite atrocious. they feel they are getting a free ride because of the political correctness that is really handcuffing us from going after these guys and getting them out of there. the community wants them out of there. if the elected officials representing this community, that are actually employing policies that are to the detriment of the people they are representing. >> tucker: as you always, we see that story every single day here in d.c. thank you for joining us tonight. i appreciate that. >> thank you, tucker. >> tucker: up next, congress

is boiseed to defy president trump money for the border wall to keep the government going. why the wall is so bad it's worth closing the government over. actor tim dale solid here to explain why you ought to keep funding the artsdz to the tune of several hundred million dollars a year stay ♪ ♪ ♪ i'm dr. kelsey mcneely and some day you might be calling me an energy farmer. ♪ energy lives here. parts a and b and want more coverage, guess what? you could apply for a medicare supplement insurance plan whenever you want. no enrollment window. no waiting to apply. that means now may be a

great time to shop for an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. medicare doesn't cover everything. and like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, these help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. so don't wait. call now to request your free decision guide. it could help you find the aarp medicare supplement plan that works for you. these types of plans have no networks, so you get to choose any doctor who accepts medicare patients. rates are competitive, and they're the only plans of their kind endorsed by aarp. remember - these plans let you apply all year round. so call today. because now's the perfect time to learn more. go long.

>> tucker: the federal government is on pace for a possible shutdown tomorrow night with congress feuding over what to include in a spending bill that it must pass. one of the biggest obstacles so far is the funding for the president's border wall the one ran on. fund the hiring of additional border agents. how did opposition to border security become an issue this important worth closing the government over. congressman henry qua joins us tonight. thanks for comingen. >> it's a pleasure. thank you. >> tucker: i keep hearing this argument take no

offense cost tooches. it's a waste. people totally unwilling to fund head start. what is it really about the wall that makes democrats mad enough to shut down the government over? >> well, i can't speak for everybody. i will talk to -- i will say what effects me for somebody that lives on the border all my life, first of all, we believe in homeland security. we wanted the home land security. but we want to have a homeland security that really works. a wall or a fence can't provide some, you know, some tactical assistance. no ifs, no buts, especiallily in areas like arizona. one space to the other. we have a river. we have west texas. the thing is we can secure the border by having technology. arrow stats 24 hours night and day cameras. sensors, cameras, more personnel. i want to see more border patrol. so we got to know how to secure the border. because, after all we do spend about $18 billion a year on total border

security. >> tucker: here is what i am confused by. i spent a lot of time in your district right on the border hunting there is a lot of border security. you see border patrol. jeeps going by. blimps in the air to provide ariel surveillance. you talk to the landowners there and they are finding dead people, immigrants on their property all the time. there is no stopping people from coming across. it's not working. so why would we expect it would work under your plan? >> well, i will tell you what, look, if you equate a border to just border security, that is if you have a wall and you think that's the only place to secure the wall, then we are going to have some differences. i will tell you why i think the wall has some problems. first of all, we will talk about private property rights. number one. but the other thing is, let's say you build the most beautiful wall. home land security will tell you that over 40% of the people that we have here. 11 or 12 million undocumented aliens came in through a legal permit or visa. so that means if you put the

wall up they are going to fly over, go on a ship or drive across a bridge and a wall is not going to stop them. we have got to do enforcement. also, so we have to look at a comprehensive border. >> tucker: i don't think anyone is suggesting a wall is a panacea. doesn't solve every problem you have. this is my point. this has been going on for generations. we don't actually know how many people are here illegally. somebody says 10 to 12. 50. we can only guess. congress has done nothing about it a lot of people believe it's because employers don't want congress to do anything about it because they want cheap labor day. how do you know you guys are going to secure it after you haven't done so for decades. >> sounds like you are pushing for immigration reform. actually if you look at immigration reform without getting to the details. three parts. >> ones employers looking for cheap labor support. >> let me go over -- first, border security is one factor. second of all you need a guest worker plan that works and third is what do you about the 11 or 12

presidential undocumented persons that you have? let me go back to the guest worker plan. senator jeff sessions and i were in on the same page of this. if people come in and work -- a lot of people just want to come in and work. can you provide that -- you know, those jobs for the people where americans don't want to do their job. border patrol will not have to worry about those people looking for a job because they goal back on a guest worker plan. then they can focus on the bad people that are trying to hurt us. >> tucker: okay, with respect, we have been through this conversation literally for a generation on immigration reform. i think most people support in theory. it's the practice that scares everybody. congress sun willing to secure the border. it's a really simple ask from the public to the lawmakers. tell us who is coming in and out. account for the people already here. secure the border yet, it has never been done. i don't understand why. the only explanation is you don't at this point in time to be done look, remember, when i first started here,

the republicans had the presidency. just like they do right now. president bush. it was the republican congress. both senate. they had an opportunity to do that. >> tucker: they didn't want to do it because their donors didn't want to them to. as you know. nighttime here to flack for the republican party. that's true. >> who i'm saying is that, you know, we got to find a way to do this in bipartisan way if we talk about immigration reform. now, border security, this is what we need to look at. in my opinion. let's listen to the men and women you on the border. i'm talking about border patrol. they will tell you in is when you are going to have there might be places and i sthal very, very diplomatically. there might be some places where you might have some tactical fencing and border patrol will tell you that i understand that to come in and say you have to build this beautiful wall all from shiny sea to chinay sea it's not going to happen.

>> tucker: when you talk about border patrol they have a union, right. >> yes. >> did they endorse hillary. >> no. >> tucker: who did they endorse. >> they endorsed me. >> tucker: they also endorsed donald trump. what did they run on. building a big beautiful wall. if we're listening to them why don't we build a wall they desire. >> if you listen to border patrol and i work with them. listen, 31 border patrol in my area that have done a lot to secure the border. if you see talk to them a lot of times they want overtime so they can do their job. number one, number two they want equipment. you are laughing it's true. >> tucker: endorse donald trump that ran on the wall. >> the wall is 14th century solution to 21st century problem. >> tucker: all i'm doing is following your advice and listening to the border patrol they want a wall. you need to talk to them about this. >> i have talked to them. they did support me. >> tucker: who can resist supporting you.

tonight's reality check goes out to the members of the house intelligence committee. you may recall that a mere month ago, not that long ago, democrats were outraged when intelligence chairman devon nunes was allowed to privately review documents that indicated national security advisor at the time susan rice had deliberately unmavericked the names of donald trump's associates were spied upon. they tried to hound nunes from office and complained they were being kept in the dark according to a new report daily caller foundation. now that those documents have been made available. apparently democrats are no longer interested in reading them. nine democrats on the house intelligence committee but only two of them adam schiff and jim hines heinz have bothered to look at the documents. you would think with their privileged position on that important committee they would want to see all relevant information that relates to their claim president trump and his advisors are pawns of vladimir putin. they don't the reason sobbous they never really thought trump colluded with russia in the first place. they are yoursing that claim as a political tool. even basis accusations are

treason. ignorance is warring for another reason it shows how little the congress cares about the federal government spying on its own citizens, probably illegally. today it really can be boiled down this way. if my party does it, then it must be completely okay. and that's not true. coming up next, actor tim daly says president trump's plan to cut funding for the arts will destroy high culture for the masses of middle america. he is here next with his warnings. we could be philastines by year's end. stay tuned. ♪ ♪

tuck president trump's buntd proposal defunding arts programs across the country that has hollywood and broadway angry. they are warning that art

will disappear across this nation without robust taxpayer respond and daly is a seasoned and long time actor superman and leading role in the show madam secretary tomorrow advocate the right to bear arts. tim daly joins us now. good to see you. >> thank you, tucker, good to see you, too. >> tucker: look, i'm not against art. i just don't know why average people in the country in which the middle class is shrinking, getting poorer year ought to be subsidizing rich people pay for art. >> that's exactly not what's been happening. i agree with you. the national endowment for the arts does not subsidize rich people. it has grants that go to every congressional district in this country. hollywood is going to be broad. broadway is going to be fine. kennedy center is going to be final. it's the little towns in idaho and nebraska which otherwise would have no arts at all. and their children would not be exbose odd to or participate in the arrests that need this program.

i would also say that, you know, characterized in your introduction that there were several hundred million. no, 155 million. and also that it was robust support of the arts, whichnot. it's minuscule. 0.44. >> tucker: it's not necessary then. is it? i don't understand in a country why a small number of people have larger accumulations of wealth than anyone has accumulated in history why jeff bezos can't pay for this single-handedly. >> i will tell you why because that society, culture where the arts are the elm seas of the unique americanness of what we are, you need the federal government to at least make this gesture towards what we stand for. and the thing small grants that go out, first of all, they generate a huge amount of return to the federal treasury. every dollar spent generates like $7 back to the federal treasury. an argument could be made

that the national endowment for the arts budget should be, you know, 100 times bigger if it generates that kind of income. >> tucker: i'm a little bit confused. we are both agreeing here that arts are really important i guess or you are making that case. i fly fish. and there is nothing more important to me outside of work and my family than fly fishing. and it's part of american history. i single dollar of my ohio state buckeyemy hobby offly fis. who decides that creating a mural or performing interpretive dance is more important than what i do to relax. >> the national endowment for the arts. >> >> tucker: that's exactly it? who made that decision? was there a vote on it. >> the government did. >> tucker: okay. >> it's turned tout to be a great decision. first of all, for the economy. because, as i say, it's a big generator of wealth. second of all, it does things, for instance, you know, the national endowment for the arts is in partnership with walter reed v.a. hospital.

>> tucker: yeah. >> where the creative coalition is going tomorrow. these small grants multiply a lot of money and they help veterans who have suffering from ptsd. >> tucker: that is i think thats great. i'm not against that if you took a poll of veterans would you rather see modern dance at walter reed or would you rather go a nascar event. i would bet it really wouldn't be close. there are towns and even cities in this country that are very far from nascar tracks. it takes hours to go see a nascar event. why wouldn't that money be better spent constructing nascar venues which is what more people would like to see than interpretive dance venues? >> i will tell you why, because there has been a survey of every fortune 500 company in this country. the one thing that they say they want their employees to have more than anything else is creative thinking. they want creative thinkers in these companies. creativity is a muscle. the arts are the gem for that muscle. it's the bench press. it's the arm cellular.

if yocurl.if you have creative t force these people have creative imagination. if you expose people to the arts. engineer without creative training technician, cog in the machine. an engineer with creative training with imagination is going continue to vent the machine. >> tucker: that's a pretty closer argument and nobody is against creativity. i'm emphatically for it which is why i'm against arts funding because it kills it anything you subsidize through federal bureaucracy makes you less creative. leaving that aside is there is a study that points to that looking at any funding arts produces more creativity than going to nascar event. >> absolutely. americans for the arts have collected data on this for decades. and, for instance, you know, if you -- >> tucker: they tracked people that have gone to na installations over times longitudinal to say they are more creative. >> let me give you example. i cut my teeth at a theater in rhode island where you went to school i believe. >> tucker: yes, i did.

>> called trinity ref in. it started out in a church put together a theater. turned into one of the people are eminent regional theaters in the country. one of the things they did is started a program called operation discovery, yes, operation discovery. they made it so that every public school kid in the state of rhode island, for free, got on a bus and came to see shows. what that did for that community, for that city, for that entire region was create an economy and a culture of creative people who were interested in theater and it revitalized. >> tucker: simple question why does it have one of the highest unemployment rates in the country? >> i don't know why it does right now. >> tucker: i would think the arts would kind of save that fix that. >> i'm going to tell you right now the arts is not part of the problem. >> tucker: okay. the question is, look, again, i'm not against the arts. i like the arts. whatever that means. anything crucifix in a glass of urine was described as

art. i'm not against arts broadly. i don't think most people are the problem is like the infrastructure is crumbling and the schools don't have enough teachers and the debt is out of control and medicare and social security are under funded at this moment when everybody is digging deep to make sure we keep going the government may shut down tomorrow. why don't a few rich people get together maybe actors sand say we are not going to put the burden on taxpayer we will subsidize it ourselves. >> that's like saying why doesn't tom cruz become the head of the fda. you have your meat stamped by tom cruise. steve. >> tucker: who better to fund arts like actors? >> this has nothing to do with artists per se. this has to do with the population of the united states. >> tucker: nonartists need to fund artists because why? why can't artists fund this. >> this has become a well known quote.

churchill we have got to cut our fund forth arts and put it towards the war effort. and churchill's response was what are we fighting for? he understood in a society, in a culture the arts are what make life worth living. look, the art is the only pursuit that we have. >> tucker: it would be so tempting to make fun of that but i'm not going to because, again, i like the art. i like the arts. i sincerely do. i'm just saying there are priorities. you have to create a hierarchy of what's most important. right now everyone is under the gun. why can't you, look at the camera and say hey, jeff bezos, you are second richest person in america. why are not give up $10 billion if it's that important? >> i'm sure jeff bezos and a lot of other multimillionaires and billionaires give a lot of money to the arts. >> tucker: i'm not sure at that. >> the arts in new york are thriving and d.c. they give money to big organizations. >> tucker: they could foot this bill in the afternoon without even thinking about it? >> but that's not the point. the point is that when you have a government that

represents the people. >> tucker: right. >> as described in the constitution of, you know, being responsible for the general welfare of the people. you want to make sure that your population gets exposure to things that will help them there are statistics from the americans for the arts, for instance, i think that if most mothers knew that if their child had a complete curriculum in the arts, that their child would be three times more likely to graduate from high school. that is like a vaccination against all kinds of social isles. that will keep killed out of the justice system. the welfare system. >> tucker: i'm not against that again, we could just fix this problem problem immediately if people who benefited from the economy the last 10 years the least generous generation of rich people in this country has ever seen, would change their ways, and start funding things for the common good. and they could start here i think and you got their numbers. you should call them. >> i don't have their numbers. [laughter] >> tucker: let's get together after the show.

[laughter] thank you, tim. great to sigh. >> thank you, tucker. >> tucker: good luck on the hill. something new. tonight we want to bring you update on the state of the sadly but deeply polarized country. survey by the public religion researc research instie found democrats are three times as likely as republicans to unfriend somebody on facebook purely because of politics. new study by harvard shows how unlikely this is for this to actually happen because relatively few facebook users know any republican notice first place. the survey which interviewed millennials aged 18 to 29 found that 61% of ewing democrats do not have a close relationship with a single person who voted for donald trump. not one person. meanwhile most republicans did have a close relationship with a hillary clinton voter. 64% of democrats say they aren't close with a single evangelical crilings. not one. keep in mind that evangelicals make up more than a quarter of the american population. americans just don't know them and maybe don't want to. in fact, democrats are nearly as likely to be as

close with an amuslim than evangelize despite the fact that only 3 million muslims in the entire country. well this ideological separation is not harmless knowing different people with different opinions may not create agreement but it does promote some level of understanding and goodwill. segregation does breed contempt and eventually hatred and a nation cannot survive when half its citizens hate the other half. that was the whole promise of diversity, remember? liberals are always talking about that. always lecturing you about it. but apparently they have no intention of practicing it at least according to these studies. lauren green with talk will her spiritual journey and new book she has written about it new bar in manhattan certainly to be popular hating donald trump. take a look at how they

♪ >> tucker: time now for

"the friend zone." tonight, one of the kindest people at fox news, lauren green. she just released a fantastic new book and she joins us tonight. >> thank you so much for being g me on the show. >> tucker: you are not afraid of saying what you believe. that is what i love about you. you just kind of put it out there. this book is in part a reflection of your personal spiritual journey. >> this book has been about ten years in the active making. but over my entire life, it's been brewing and brewing. i heard a sermon on the ten commandments in real life. it was both a product of faith and really bringing -- that is why the book is called "lighthouse faith." it's really about love, and

loss. it's about strength, comfort, coming home. it's a symbol of god's love because it is in structure, just like god's commandments. >> tucker: what about the sermon on the ten commandments? what about it grabbed you? >> the ten commandments are not just an arbitrary list but an actual description of who god i is. you have a seminal point and everything else can be defined by that relationship to that seminal point. it's a both statement and command. and a statement of fact. >> tucker: if you meditate on that and adhere to that, the rest kind of fall into place? >> that began the journey and i

have a music background. faith and music, i was using the harmonica chorus. i looked at the structure and was laid out pretty much like the structure of the ten commandments. perhaps there is something in the structure of the ten commandments that is a template for all of us. not just how we should behave. >> tucker: wow. that is pretty heavy. where were you? >> i tell the story in the book. i was in ethiopia. we just gone to a church where they say the ten commandments -- the actual arc of the covenant is held. we were trying to talk to the priest.ng freaky that happened with our camera. it just fell over and everything with blue after that. i get back to the hotel and i start analyzing the ten commandments and this revelation about the ten commandments and music hits me like a bolt of

lightning. >> tucker: such a cool story by such a cool person. a lot of where to borrow themes out there, christmas -- comic books, pirate bars, even in hg lovecraft bar. there's a protest themed bar, of course the bars name is coup. the bar pledges to donate all of its profits to various left-wing organizations like planned parenthood and the aclu. patrons get tokens with their drinks. it's an experience. people that can't even get a drink without politicizing will have a place to do both. that's it for us tonight.

tune in every night at 8:00 to the show that is the sworn enemy of lying come lying, pomposity, smugness and groupthink. good night from washington. our friends on "the five" live in new york city. >> thanks, tucker. i am dana perino along with kimberly guilfoyle, juan williams, greg gutfeld, and this is "the five" ." saturday is president presidens 100th day in office. also renewing the health care push. >> we want to go when we are ready to go. this has been a very bottom-up process. it takes time to do that. we are doing big things. i talk about 200 days. we are working on the path to get it right and not some artificial