have a great weekend, everybody. ♪ ♪ >> tucker: good evening, and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." she is back, despite being rejected by the american electorate in two separate presidential contests. hillary clinton is looking toki reestablish herself in politicsb first off, she publicly blamed james comey and the media for her defeat, sending the message to loyalists that she didn't lose at all. >> i was on the way to winning until a combination of jim comey's letter on october 28th and russian wikileaks raised doubts in the minds of people who were inclined to vote for me but got scared off.

>> tucker: well, her countless fans in the media, including the one you saw interviewing her in the clip, lapped this up and cheered her return to the scene. >> found this to be mosts astonishing hillary clinton experience i've ever seen. it was perhaps her at her most authentic. >> i think what jim comey did is to throw overboard a justice department procedure because of political reasons. his own internal politics, because of the hatred of hillary clinton within the fbi -- >> 20% of people voted because of racism. and i think after eight years o. black president there was no way this woman was going to win. >> tucker: oh, they live in an irony-free world. all that gushing. it's not so surprising if you've been following it. remember these "new york times" headlines from the days right before the election? on the hillary side, here's one. "hillary clinton sees ugliness and joy in the race's o closing days."

and this, "big names campaigning for hillary clinton underscore donald trump's isolation." how about this one? "donald trump's moments and missteps: a look back," or "black voters aghast at trump, find a place of food and comfort." but, wait, didn't trump get o a higher percentage of the african-american vote than mitt romney did? the press didn't know what they were talking about, maybe they still don't. other than that, it's hard to argue that they were rooting for donald trump to become president, and many hillary fans disagree with that.ar peter daou, for example an advisor of the 2008 campaign. thank you for coming out. >> pleasure, thank you. >> i don't doubt that the comey announcement had an effect. i thought that at the time. but the press was four square for hillary clinton the moment that donald trump got the nomination. they didn't hide it at all. the emails that were leaked from john podesta's email account proved they were collaborating with the hillary campaign. there is not a much of an argument to make.

do you think that the press was on trump side? >> a conservative is going to say the mainstream media was against donald trump, president trump. the liberals, progressive democrats, will say they are against hillary clinton. the fact is there have been independent studies that were done, and both candidates got very bad press. candidate trump got terrible press. hillary clinton got very bad press. one thing that was profoundly different though, on the emails particularly, 300 days from a research team. 600 consecutive days of coverage that far, far outweighed any coverage of any other trump story. >> tucker: where was that coverage? was that in "the new york times," "washington post" -- oh, no, it wasn't. i ran one of those news organizations at the time. nope, that's not true. "the new york times" dide. not n 600 days -- >> gallup had an analysis that said the only thing that the voters heard when they

heard hillary clinton's name was email. the word email was larger thanwo every single other word. the email story dominated coverage from the very beginning. she made a mistake. >> tucker: on the right it did, but not in "the new york times," not in "the washington post." "the new york times" wrote pieces like this. three days before the election, hillary clinton at a campaign rally. i am quoting this now. this is like a prose poem. "there is an unfamiliar sensee f abandonment and joy. s the rain grows heavier, her wet clothes turn a shade darker. she takes in the scene around her and laughs before she finishes her sentence." i could go on, but i'm feeling creepy about it. meanwhile, same day, i won't goe on, but the headline in the "times". trump is a villain, hillary is a hero. that's the story line in every media organization in america. >> i dispute that completely.. you can cherry pick stories

that were positive for her or negative against him. at the end of the day, the overall narrative in the mainstream media, and my issue has been with "the new york times," "the washington post," and other networks. there was analysis done of the major network coverage, three nightly news coverage, 6:1 ratio over her policies. how can voters decide -- look, donald trump won the election. he's a legitimate president. i've always said that. this is about telling the truth about what happened. let me just say this, tucker. these independent studies are done by political hacks posing as journalists. i am a journalist! i know people who work there. you aren't going to tell me, because i know them, they are politically independent becausen they are not here they are glorified as martha raddatz was when she fought on television about trump's victory. that's true! >> let me give you a narrative, and frameworks, tidy through everything. a lot of people fall in this trap. it's the basic narrative of thee race. that donald trump is somehow a terribly weak candidate, came

down of his fellows, mocking him, laughing him. i tweeted the next day, take this guy seriously. >> tucker: you are smarter than most on that. i think you're absolutely right there. d'r he was not taken seriously bye. the press. they like him because they thought he was a sideshow, divided a pretty strong field. when it became clear he had a remote chance of winning, they piled up -- the guys who campaigned on "the new york times," we don't have to guess what they wrote, they wrote it. right after the election. as a "new york times" reporter, "we had fearless journalism throughout 2016. voters wanted what they wanted." in other words, we tried our best to keep this guy from becoming president, they voted for him anyway. >> i don't want to litigate michael barbaro and "the new york times." i was going to finish my point in the coverage. the premise was, he was such aov terrible candidate that if hillary clinton didn't win by 20 points, he is somehow was going -- o a total failure and shoulo a failure toe her.

he eviscerated a field of 17 republicans.s. this guy was very tough to beat. the fact that hillary clinton made history -- this is a country based on fairness, we celebrate the people who had great compliments. hillary clinton was the first woman ever in american history to win nomination. you have people yelling at her to go away, shut up, apologize. as far as i'm concerned, it was a contest of two strong candidates, they both made mistakes.plry and at the end of the day, hest became the president through our constitution. he's the president based on our constitution. >> tucker: i mean, i agree with a lot of what you said, it just grates to hear the press described as anything but what they were, which was much more in favor of hillary clinton then donald trump. they are horrified by trump. he attacks them directly, they take it personally. they really wanted her to win. they might not like her personally, not a lot of them did, they wanted her to win. that's just true. >> [laughs]o look, it's what you are j stating. i see it the exact opposite. i as i say, that 6:1 study of issues over emails. the playing field was tilted against her unfairly. this is not about relitigating, this is about telling the truth.

she did not face a fair playing field, that's just a fact. >> tucker: it's so interesting. obviously, i was at a newspaper in arkansas 25 years ago. i watched the clintons carefully for a long time. have you noticed a continuity of story lines? they always make the case, her husband does the same thing. "we are being treated unfairly, we are the victims of some kind of bias, people are mean to us for no reasons we can explain."r have you noticed this? >> i wasn't there, so i'm talking about this particular election i covered carefully.y.e there were two candidates under investigation, the public only thought one was. as i say, two candidates fighting one another, one ended up being president, but the playing field was not level for hillary clinton. >> tucker: just in point of fact, we don't know right now that donald trump has been the w subject of an fbi investigation, but his campaign and the people around them, do we know something different from that? >> i'm just saying what i've heard from fbi director comeyen was testimony with the elections committee has said. i don't know more what i've heard publicly. what i heard publicly, there is confirmation that there's investigation. >> tucker: on him? i don't know if that's true. >> i also tweeted that i don't

think it's going to take down as many people on the democratic side believe. >> tucker: they should listen to you, peter. thank you for coming on.cr >> my pleasure.n thank you. >> tucker: dave weigel is a politics reporter for "the washington post," which implies a lot of things, including that he's likely not a fan of the show. indeed, he is not, judging by his reaction to an interview we did wednesday night. ben smith, the editor of the buzzfeed came on, and we had a vigorous discussion about liberal groupthink in the press. we disagree with each other, but i wasn't hostile. i enjoyed it actually. and i think smith enjoyed it too. weigel didn't enjoy it -- too many different opinions on display and those hend doesn't agree with. like the d.c. journalist he is, weigel whined about it on twitter.it "why does ben smith keep diving into this endless pool of bad faith," he tweeted. keeping smith in mind. smith has been on this show two times and we gave him time b

to answer straightforward questions. it's called legitimate debate. to a "washington post" reporter, someone who lives in a world where every singlewh person has identical views of everything, all of them fashionable, all of them unquestioned, that looks like bad faith to him. naturally, we invited weigel to come on tonight and explain himself. i emailed him this morning. he wrote back to say that he couldn't do it. he was planning to watch a movie. two obvious points. first, diversity means difference. guys like weigel love diversity when it means people who look different, but the diversity of views? that's terrifying to them. it's a threat to the moralinit monopoly they believe they hold in american life. it suggests that people who t aren't evil or stupid might have come to different conclusions from the ones they came to and may even have a valid point. that possibility is an -- unacceptable to them. it shakes their faith in their own virtue. so they bat it away with name-calling, they always do. "bad faith, fascism, basket of deplorables," whatever. you've heard it all before. they are going to keep saying it until you shut up because that's the point of seeing it in the first place. and the second point here. it takes a lot for liberals to

come on the show. thanks to people like weigel, there's a lot of peer pressure to come on. when they do come on, it won't be fluffy. they are going to have to answer the question. night after night, some of them come out anyway, and we are grateful for that. they may be wrong or misguided, but at least they aren't cowards. for 14 years, a town of pennsylvania has featured a bench with an inspirational quote that mentioned god. the atheist police are on the scene and are forcing its removal. we will talk to a representative from the american atheists up next. also, president trump's executive order onn consecutive -- sanctuary cities may be blocked, but texas is taking matters in its own hands with a bill to punish officials. we will talk to texas governor greg abbott in just a minute. it delivers a gentle mist to help block six key inflammatory substances. most allergy pills only block one. new flonase sensimist.

click (male announcer) hit escape with great deals on great gear. like our huge selection of shorts for the whole family. only at bass pro shops. does it look like i'm done?yet? shouldn't you be at work? [ mockingly ] "shouldn't you be at work?" todd. hold on. [ engine revs ] arcade game: fist pump! your real bike's all fixed. man, you guys are good! well, we are the number-one motorcycle insurer in the country. -wait. you have a real motorcycle? and real insurance, with 24-hour customer support. arcade game: wipeout! oh! well... i retire as champion. game hog! champion.

for years, centurylink has been promising fast internet to small businesses. but for many businesses, it's out of reach. why promise something you can't deliver? comcast business is different. ♪ ♪ we deliver super-fast internet with speeds of 250 megabits per second across our entire network, to more companies, in more locations, than centurylink.

we do business where you do business. ♪ ♪ ♪ >> tucker: well, a city in pennsylvania is removing a park bench with a religious quote in order to placate angry atheists. a public park in oil city features a bench donated in 2003 by the local branch of the vfw. the bench says, "men who aren'tt governed by god will be governed by tyrants." american atheist sent a letter demanding the removal of the bench, and the town complied fearing the cost of litigation if they didn't. the national legal director of american atheists. thanks for amanda, thank you for coming on. >> thank you for having me. >> tucker: if they are governed by god, they will be governed by tyrants. are you the tyrants in the story? >> we are the folks that fight for equality for everyone.

the bench was put on a veterans memorial, it was demeaning to anyone who was a non-christian veteran. >> tucker: it's not just christians who believe in god. virtually everyone but you and buddhists believe in god. >> about 25% of military enlistment either claim no religious preference or atheist, agnostic. e >> tucker: the idea is the word "god" is offensive, the appearance of the word god -- >> no, not the word god, but assuming if you aren't a religious person or a christian judeo-christian, you will be governed by tyrants, this dismisses morality and compassion that our veterans and soldiers have. but because they don't believe in god doesn't mean they are -- >> tucker: no one is suggesting that. this is a park bench in a town down on its luck, not a rich place at all. you come in with a well-funded group and say, do what we wanto. >> that is not what we did. >> tucker: sure, it is. >> if you look at the first letter, we went for a complaint. >> tucker: who was the complaint from? >> a resident in the city. >> tucker: who?

>> i'm not going to say his name. he wants to remain confidential. >> tucker: on the basis of an anonymous complaint, someone thinking forward -- >> we know their name. >> tucker: but don't the residents -- look, you do not live in -- >> not in litigation. >> tucker: it's a park bench. so one guy who doesn't even have the courage to stand up and reveal his identity gets to control the entire existence of this park bench?nt >> no, the constitution covers the bench. >> tucker: it has nothing to do with this. >> this bench had nothing too do with veterans either. >> tucker: was the bench establishing a state religion? a >> it's on the city park and the city agreed to accept it, they were saying that anyone is a veteran that doesn't believe in god is someone who will be ruled by tyrants.oe again, dismissing the compassion and the morality that comes from -- >> tucker: okay, they said something that you don't agree with, which is okay. lots of things that the government says i don't agree with. this is not an establishment of state religion -- >> according to the supreme court, if you do not

open up to all points of view -- >> tucker: the supreme court didn't say that, that's why the currency continues to have "in god we trust" on it. federal judges are also invoking god.er i'm just saying, we live in a country where the u.s. government uses the word god all the time. >> the supreme court says it is ceremonial deism. and we still fight that. we we think it is wrong because- >> tucker: why not take on the currency? >> we have! >> tucker: basically the point is -- you crush the little guy -- >> we're not crushing the little guy. we offered to pay for a brand-new bench. >> tucker: really? what would the bench be like? >> we told them that the vfw would pick out a quote that is appropriate to the veterans, we would pay for a brand-new bench. >> tucker: but you wanted to pum "for american atheist." >> we want on there a little plaque -- >> tucker: you are putting your religion on the bench, but you aren't violating the first amendment? >> because we weren't making any

kind of statement about -- >> tucker: sure. they have the word god there, the word god is offensive -- >> not the word god, it's the phrasing of -- >> tucker: it's a very old quote. >> you are talking about ideas and things. you may feel that. but you are christian. people who aren't christian look at that and don't feel the same way.re >> tucker: i get your point. but you are violating your own principles because you're saying you wanted to replace the bench you claim is a representation of christianity with a bench that has an explicit statement about atheism -- >> no. we don't want any explicit -- >> tucker: but you want a donation to the american atheists. >> that's where it's from. we wouldn't have a problem with the vfw putting it on there that they paid for it. the statement itself would have been -- >> tucker: but your name itself is a statement. the quote is not an endorsement of religion. >> well, that is your take on it, but we believe it is. >> tucker: having a bench that has american atheist on it, doesn't that make nonatheists feel demeaned? look, here's the point. this is not about making a group of people feel included, it's about crushing people -- >> no, it's not. >> tucker: of course it is.

>> no, it isn't. >> tucker: why aren't you doing this, i don't know, to the federal government? >> we are. there are several organizations and we have ongoing lawsuits about how christians get special tax treatment, how they don'trg have to have transparency,y, how preachers get a special deduction on their mortgages and homes. all kind of things -- >> tucker: what about the declaration of independence?. >> what about it? >> tucker: it says the word god -- >> no, it doesn't. it says creator. >> tucker: that is a synonym for god. >> in your opinion. >> tucker: okay, but it's a founding document that is part of our secular religion here in the united states, the declaration of independence is central to our history. >> it is. >> tucker: it's something alll schoolchildren learn about, and yet it's got god all over it. >> it doesn't have god, it's got creator. >> tucker: god, creator, deity, it's the same thing. >> okay, but when they did in our constitution, they left godg out of it.

>> tucker: i'm just saying, do you think that the declaration should be stored in the national archives. >> i think it has historical value, but we have to recognize the people who wrote it back in the 1700s had very different views than we do and had a very different understanding of the world. >> tucker: if you saw a swing set in oil city, pennsylvania, that had a cross on it, someone carved a cross in it, a christian symbol, would you tell them to take it down? >> no. o >> tucker: why? >> unless the city approved it, it's graffiti. no, i wouldn't. >> what if the city had a swing set that had a cross? >> what swing set would that have a cross? >> tucker: i don't know, it's a christian symbol. the point is, look, no one was being hurt. >> that's your point of view. there are people in the town, veterans, who did not like it. >> tucker: who were they? >> i'm not going to give that. >> tucker: if you will not give them their name, you're telling me to believe that there are any people offended by this, you won't say who they were, a lot of people say they like the bench --he

>> okay. >> tucker: we know their names, but the basics you claim is an anonymous complaint, nobody gets the bench? >> the bench is now in the vfw site, so it's still there. >> tucker: last question, why hassle people? let's be totally real. in a country where every senator swears in on the bible, you are hassling some little town in pennsylvania -- >> not all members of congress swear in the bible. many of them use the constitution or -- >> tucker: or the koran, but religious documents. why are you bothering these people? >> someone came to us and we thought there was a constitutional issue and the city agreed, they removed it. >> tucker: okay.y. i think it's awful that people anonymously can hurt other people without standing up and saying who they are. >> you know, the threats that we got when we did thisis -- >> tucker: whatever. t you are coming on here and saying what you think, but you are claiming that some anonymous guy hassled this little town and doesn't have the courage to say to the face of his neighbors, i find it deplorable.ur >> i'm sorry. we have a reason why he came to us.. >> tucker: thank you for joining us. t >> thank you for having me. i appreciate it. y >> tucker: yet another a widely

publicized hate crime has been exposed as a total sham. an organizer in indiana admitted that he spray-painted his own church with a swastika, a "heil trump," and an anti-gay slur. the organist is a man called george nathaniel stang, says he wrote wanted to give local people a reason to fight for good, even if it was a false flag.fl the ends justify the means. notably, this specific case was one of many alleged hate crimes that was used by the press to vilify and marginalize republican voters in the last few months. "the washington post" ran the story as the lead anecdote in a piece that chronicled "numerous incidents that have occurred in the wake of trump's election." in fact, the "post" mentioned this incident in a bunch ofs articles, but for some reason, they haven't posted a single piece about how the attack is a hoax, because they are liars. another hate crime in the same article, a michigan student told she had to take off her hijab or she'd be set on fire, immolated. it didn't happen.

many more. the surge of threats against jewish community centers that we heard a lot about? that turned out to be the work of a left-wing journalist and an israeli man. they took white men who attacked a muslim woman at uc san diego, remember that? they didn't exist either. these hoaxes have been happening for years, you can pay a visit to fakehatecrimes.org. more likely because hoaxes like this suit their political agenda. so they keep repeating them. well, a professor at ucla says the school is trying to fire him for refusing to endorse a culture of political correctness. he joins us coming up. claritin provides powerful, non-drowsy, 24-hour relief. for fewer interruptions from the amazing things you do every day. live claritin clear. every day.

>> tucker: this past february, we welcomed attorney and ucla professor keith fink on the show. told us about how his school is bent on stamping out conservative beliefs including in his classroom. watch.h. >> you feel like it's a microcosm or a microcosm, they continuously and consistently trample students' rights. they abuse the law, they twist the law, they send out these emails which either kill speech that they don't like or they actually punish students that run afoul of these types of policies that don't conform to their liberal ideology.

>> tucker: have things improved since then? we like to keep up with these stories. they have not. according to professor fink, they have not. he tells us that the school is trying to fire him. professor fink joins us. there is a petition signed by some of your students that says this. "ucla taught us to fight injustice wherever it rears its ugly head. we will not sit idly by and watch a beloved professor have his teaching career discarded in a politically motivated and morally bankrupt fashion." is your career being destroyed by ucla? >> my teaching career is being destroyed. it's being destroyed at ucla. i've had other schools reach out to offer me teaching positions, but i am a ucla alumnus, and the one school i want to teach is the school where i've spent my formative years. they are doing everything they can to fire me. and let me just tick off for you what happened after i came on your show two months ago. they held a meetingng

in secret which the meeting can only be described something akin to a modern-day star chamber. i was not allowed to come to the meeting to state my reasons fora wanting to teach at the school and to address any questions or concerns the committee had. but worse than that, the person who did the single-most important thing that goes into the committee's decision was someone who was biased. part of the evaluation process is, there has to be a faculty member sit in the class and do a review. they asked me at the beginning of the process who was biased.y i told them who was biased. and who did they choose? somebody that was biased. why did they do that? if you have anybody sit in my class and sit in and listen to the way i thought, they would conclude they were excellent w d -- i was excellent and then so some. i then asked the university of those who are biased against me on the committee would follow basic notions of due process and fairness and recuse themselves from the vote yesterday. what was i told? no. ucla does not have a policy

whereby one who is prejudiced or biased would recuse themselves. third, those on the committee are unqualified. if you -- ucla's own policies as when you have an important review like this, you will make sure that there is somebody qualified to do the review. there was not a single person who was a lawyer, there was not a single person with any knowledge in free speech, the first amendment, or due process. is the subject matter i teach. >> tucker: let me stop you there. i've been following this case fairly closely. and at one point, it seems like the school solicited reviews of your class from kids who had not taken your class. is that true? >> well, i don't know how, of the 8,000 students who have taken my class, i don't know how they solicited. but you are correct. when i look at my review file, there is a review from a student that said, i don't know why you reach out to me, i don't know professor fink. >> tucker: is there anything -- bottom line.

you are one of a relatively small number of nonliberals on ucla's campus. do you have any recourse? clearly the people who run the place don't like you. the politics sound like they have something to do with it. what about donors? what about the board of theho school? what about political figures in the state? is there anything you can do to keep from getting bounced because you are saying things they don't like? >> look. they bounced me yesterday, we know this. this has been going on now for the last two quarters now. the entire administration knows it. the board knows it. we've seen national news coverage but not a single person has reached out to try to speak with me. what do people do? i'm fighting this on principle. the principles i'm fighting for are very important to this country. it's free speech and due process. what can people do? students are rallying to my support. students can fight for me and fight for the principles i'm standing for. but most importantly, donors can stand up. and donors should not contribute -- well, that's exactly -- donors should not contribute to schools, even my school, if they won't comply with basic notions

of due process and fundamental fairness. >> tucker: we've got to go, we are out of time. the other thing they can do is defund this garbage, which the u.s. congress funds for in part. keep us posted. >> thank you, tucker. >> tucker: next up a share of whose county borders mexico is not a fan of the border wall. he calls it a medieval solution to the problem. he joins us in a minute. ♪

♪ ♪ take on the mainstream. introducing nissan's new midnight edition. ♪ a cockroach can survive submergede guy. underwater for 30 minutes. wow. yeah, wow.

not getting in today. not on my watch. pests never stop trying to get in. we never stop working to keep them out. terminix. defenders of home.

this is bill's yard. and bill has a "no-weeds, not in my yard" policy. but with scotts turf builder weed & feed, bill has nothing to worry about.

it kills weeds and greens grass, guaranteed. this is a scotts yard. and greens grass, guaranteed. z286oz zwtz y286oy ywty >> tucker: mark napier is the sheriff of pima county, arizona.erim it borders mexico. he's a republican elected the same night as donald trump, but he's not a fan of the proposed border wall. he says it is a medieval solution to a modern problem. instead of spending money on the wall, he says that the trump administration should give $5 million to his department so he can improve policing on the border.il sheriff napier, thank you for coming on.ou >> thank you for having me, tucker. >> tucker: i've heard this line a bunch. you may have thought this up, you think this is a medieval solution to a modern problem, but it seems that it is actually

a medieval problem. people sweeping across europe borders. romans dealt with it. 2,000 years ago, the solution then was a wall. the chinese built a wall, english built a wall, israel built a wall, they work. why wouldn't it work in arizona? >> good many reasons.n one is cost, tucker. 10,000 years, mankind has beenn building around walls around things. one would think in 2017 with the robust array of resources we have, o resources, we can come up with a better solution. i am absolutely a proponent of securing the border. my fear is we are continuing this dialogue of a wall, a wall, a wall, which, to many of us, doesn't seem credible. and in that, we are losing the more serious discussions about how to better secure our borders at a lowerbe point, more effectively. that's my concern. the porous nature of our border is a national security problem, it's a public safety problem, human rights problem. all manner of transnational crime is coming where the border is. p

about 150 people a year die in the deserts of western pima county, where i was at a community event last night. i'm one of the only sheriffs that has an industrial refrigerator outside one of my district stations the only purpose for which is to store human remains of people who die in the desert. >> tucker: it's awful, i agree with everything you say. nobody in washington wants to secure the border, that's why we've never done it. there's a lot of political pressure.he democratic party wants more voters, it's never happened. the beauty of the wall is it's permanent, and as permanent as things get. why at least not do that? if it's a cost to have illegal immigration, why not try that? nothing else has worked. >> tucker, there are many reasons.in one is there isn't infrastructure near the ports of the border that we want to construct a wall, the workforce we would need to secure a wall in a traditional sense. i would much rather we changewe the discourse to looking at a

wall as an analogous term of an impenetrable barrier that might be in place of technology, it might be fixed barriers and other places, it might be human resources or a blend of all of the above in other places. but there is land-use things, topography, we have a native american reservation here that trend transcends the international border. there are some environmental problems as well. >> tucker: i understand all that, it would be expensive and difficult. can you see why voters like the idea of a wall? they don't believe you or anyone er washington. nobody wants to deal with the problem.on they say they do, but they really don't. they really don't. they think it's racist to keep people out of the country. and so, like, they just want concrete evidence that somebody is taking this seriously. i think maybe that's what it's about. >> i think -- tucker, i think, moreover, it's an easy sound bite.as it's easy to digest. we start talking about the fact there are 380 miles of international border in my state, i'm responsible for about 125 miles of that. it's easy to talk about a wall.

it's an easy sound bite to digest. t when you start talking about mountains and rivers that flow tribal reservations, this is a very complex issue. and perhaps that's why we are still dealing with it. >> tucker: do you know what's an easy sound bite? with respect? that this is a medieval solution to a modern problem. that's the most facile of all sound bites on it.t. and the truth is, people don't take it seriously. i'm not saying you particularly, but our elected officials don't take it seriously. again, you sound like a sincere person, but nothing we've done in the past 15 years has really -- in the past 50 years has really worked. and so what's the guarantee that your solution will be different and will work? >> well, tucker. rather than holding the sheriff county responsible, let's hold the people in washington, d.c., responsible and kicking the can down the road for decades. this is my home, tucker. i live with these problems every day. >> tucker: hold on, you areh also asking for federal money. you're saying, we don't want to

spend all this money, you have concerns with the federal budget. i want money for my department, which is fine. but how do you know that's going to work when it hasn't worked in the last five decades? >> we have to have that commitment. we have to change the discourse on this and hold the people in washington, d.c., responsible. i'm struggling to buy cars for my deputies. they are responsible for patrolling 9,200 square miles of my county. there is nowhere in this discourse any discussion about helping border sheriffs and border communities that deal with this problem every day because washington, d.c., hasas failed us under many differentem administrations to address this problem. >> tucker: that's true. that's true. i agree with you there. >> it's not a new problem, tucker. >> tucker: it's not. >> i've been dealing with this problem for 30 years.>> >> tucker: it's not just pina county, arizona. people keep moving. the country has been totally transformed. north carolina, nowhere near the border, completely different state. all of us have a stake in this. sheriff, thanks a lot for this. i appreciate it. >> thank you very much, tucker. i appreciate being on.

>> tucker: congress keeps stonewalling president trump's wall, and a federal judge has blocked his order concerning sanctuary cities, so what is next? some states are taking immigration to their own hands. in texas, the legislature allowed state governments to impose big fines, even jail time, on local officials who ignore federal immigration laws. governor greg abbott claims he will sign this bill. thank you for coming on. what does this do exactly? this law? >> this ensures we are going to ban sanctuary cities in the state of texas and imposes civil penalties that can add up to more than $25,000 a day, it can impose jail time on officials who don't follow the law, and it can lead to the removal of these public officials from their jobs such as a sheriff like in travis county who allowed sanctuary city policies to operate in travis county. >> tucker: right. i all of that from an outsider perspective makes perfect sense, but i'm struck by the number of local sheriffs who say they are against this. why would they be against this? >> well, as you might imagine,

a sheriff probably doesn't want to wind up in jail, which would be one reason why they would be against it. second, if you look at the sheriffs who have come out against it, they are sheriffs in counties that are democrat in nature. and so i think they are talking more to their electoral base as they are to what the real issue is. tucker, what the real issue is here is public safety. people have to realize the first role of government is to keep h our people safe, and that means removing from the streets those who pose a danger, and that includes making sure that if the federal government wants someone detained, the state should cooperate in detaining that person. >> tucker: liberals are making the argument that basically illegal aliens have a right to live and work here. excuse me. i choke up just thinking about it. how long before they make the argument that illegals have the right to vote here? >> we heard echoes of that already, but, tucker, let's go back to your first premise. what we are talking about is not just whether or not illegal

immigrants have a right to be here. what we are talking about is going after those who havets an i.c.e. detainer request on them. someone who has already committed a crime, someone whoet has proven themselves to be dangerous, and someone who should not be on the streets. remember, tucker, there was a tragedy that led to a lot of this. and that is kate steinle. people are forgetting about kate steinle and what happeneded and the reason she was killed was because in part because of sanctuary city policy of san fransisco. as governor of texas, i cannot allow a san francisco kate steinle situation to be repeated here. no governor, no law enforcement official anyway should allow that tragedy to occur. >> tucker: it's awful. the reason they are allowing it to occur is because there is a political benefit to the democratic party, which expectss all of these people to become democratic voters sooner rathera than later and turn texas blue and end national politics. no republican can get elected if texas becomes a democratic state. do you acknowledge that the motive here and is it working?

>> i believe that could be a motive behind their thought process. i disagree with their conclusion, because i don't think it will turn texas blue or any other place blue because i know that it doesn't matter whar your background is. what every voter is concerned about is their safety.ev and any type of act by any official, republican or democrat, that promotes lack of safety, is going to lose their office. >> tucker: boy, i hope that is true. governor, thank you for coming onci tonight. i appreciate it. >> thank you, tucker. >> tucker: update you on the alleged rape case out ofil rockville, maryland. we did a number of shows, it was one where a teenage girl was reportedly raped. after investigating the matter, prosecutors are saying they are dropping rape charges against the two accused. they say that evidence shows the encounter was consensual. the two still face child pornography charges. deportation seedings are still underway. there is no status update for them, but we will be waiting fo

it, and we will tell you when we learn. wanda sykes is making a bizarre claim about obamacare being replaced. b which two of our contestants have the craziest story of the night? there are a lot in contention. "top that" coming up. why are you checking i want to see if it changed. credit scores don't change that much do they? really? i'll take it! sir, your credit... is great, right? when was the last time you checked? yeah, i better check my credit score.

here, try credit karma. it's free. alright, no more surprises. credit karma. give yourself some credit. the uncertainties of hep c. wondering, what if? i let go of all those feelings. because i am cured with harvoni. harvoni is a revolutionary treatment for the most common type of chronic hepatitis c. it's been prescribed to more than a quarter million people. and is proven to cure up to 99% of patients who have had no prior treatment with 12 weeks. certain patients can be cured with just 8 weeks of harvoni. before starting harvoni, your doctor will test to see if you've ever had hepatitis b, which may flare up and cause serious liver problems during and after harvoni treatment. tell your doctor if you've ever had hepatitis b, a liver transplant, other liver or kidney problems, hiv or any other medical conditions and about all the medicines you take including herbal supplements. taking amiodarone with harvoni

can cause a serious slowing of your heart rate. common side effects of harvoni include tiredness, headache and weakness. ready to let go of hep c? ask your hep c specialist about harvoni. working my canister off to clean and shine and give proven protection against fading and aging. he won't use those copycat wipes. hi...doing anything later? ooh, the quiet type. i like that. armor all original protectant. it's easy to look good.

♪ >> tucker: read the paper lately? everybody has gone insane. we decided to join in and rate the relative insanity out there in the news. time for "top that," where we will decide which is the craziest story of the night/week. our panel tonight. carrie lucas of the independent women's forum.

great to see you both. gabby?fi you first. >> if you were watching "the view" this morning -- >> tucker: of course i was. >> liberal comedian wanda sykes was wondering why republicans chose to dismantle obamacare. >> they are trying to erase anything president obama did. they want to act like that man never existed, like it never happened. i bet you mitch mcconnell was on the phone with david copperfield now. "what else you got"? i want to make them disappear. how can we make him disappear? >> why? >> racism! that's it. they couldn't handle a black president and they want to get rid of it.ac >> tucker: yeah. so if you are against obamacare, you are a bigot? >> right, it's racism apparently.t' i would like to ask her what she thinks president trump's decision to allow daca continue, leaves in place a number of policies and legislations from the obama era that he had originally said he wouldn't. so if this is racism, what are those?

is that a good thing? is she able to admit that as a liberal comedian, or is every single thing that this administration and this republican-controlled congress does rooted in racismng and bigotry? >> tucker: sure, obamacare wasck passed by an overwhelmingly white democratic majority in the congress. what does that mean? that's pretty nuts. >> let's see. i don't know if you are a "star wars" fan, tucker, but you may know that yesterday was an important day for "star wars" fans, it was may 4th, or may the fourth be with you, people are encouraged to be dressed up as their favorite "star wars" character. one kid in green bay, wisconsin, showed up in a darth vader outfit. apparent sees him and immediately called the cops. there is a lockdown, and not just in his school but the next school, until the situation was resolved.. >> tucker: because he had a light saber? >> no, he was just dressed in a scary uniform. the sad commentary that instead of talking to the kid, asking them what he was doing, makingd sure he wasn't planning to shoot

up the school, the instant reaction was to call the cops. so... >> tucker: suburbs of green bay is full of nice people. beautiful part of the country. >> the good news is the cops said they looked into it and, you know, there is no charges being pressed, they are recognizing that it was a mistake. but man. >> it's not that they thought the kid was weird, they thought he was a threat. >> they thought this could be something going on. two schools on lockdown as a result. >> tucker: depressing. both are pretty bizarre. yours makes me a little sadder, though. because wanda sykes used toe be a comedian, and a really talented one, and she's gone completely off the deep end with it's distorted her so completely that she's become someone who is screaming at you on the subway. >> she's not listening to her fans either. she was shouted down after insulting the president at a show recently.ho >> tucker: ah, that depresses me! you won. you get the trophy, everybody gets a trophy.

especially you! thank you. >> thank you. >> tucker: two nights ago, we took you to uc santa cruz where they have taken over the building. that standoff just ended. who won? you can guess.an we will verify your instincts coming up. a complete multi-vitamin with 100% daily value of more than 15 key nutrients. one a day 50+. my insurance rates are but dad, you've got... ...allstate. with accident forgiveness they guarantee your rates won't go up just because of an accident. smart kid. indeed. it's good to be in, good hands. . (man vo) it was may, when dad forgot

how to brush his teeth. (woman vo) in march, my husband didn't recognize our grandson. (woman 2 vo) that's when moderate alzheimer's made me a caregiver. (avo) if their alzheimer's is getting worse, ask about once-a-day namzaric. namzaric is approved for moderate to severe alzheimer's disease in patients who are taking donepezil. it may improve cognition and overall function, and may slow the worsening of symptoms for a while. namzaric does not change the underlying disease progression. don't take if allergic to memantine, donepezil, piperidine, or any of the ingredients in namzaric. tell the doctor about any conditions; including heart, lung, bladder, kidney or liver problems, seizures, stomach ulcers, or procedures with anesthesia. serious side effects may occur, including muscle problems if given anesthesia; slow heartbeat, fainting, more stomach acid which may lead to ulcers and bleeding; nausea, vomiting, difficulty urinating,

seizures, and worsening of lung problems. most common side effects are headache, diarrhea, dizziness, loss of appetite, and bruising. (woman 2 vo) i don't know what tomorrow will bring but i'm doing what i can. (avo) ask about namzaric today. >> tucker: want to update you on a story we did yesterday, events at uc santa cruise where a black -- santa cruz took over an administrative building and refused to leave after their demands were met. the school capitulated to every single demand. those demands were painting the black black liberty house red, black and green. every student must undergo diversity training whose contents will be reviewed and approved by the group that took over the building, because they run the school now. segregation and terrorism carry the day once again in california and you're paying for it with federal subsidies and maybe

sending your kids there. something has to change. stay tuned for "the five" next. good night from washington. see you monday. >> h hello, everyone, i'm kimberly guilfoyle. this is a fox news alert. it's just after sundown in chicago where the city is bracing itself for another bloody weekend. last year, there were 769 murders in the windy city, the most brutal in 20 years. and this year, the problem is getting even worse. earlier this week, the situation escalated when gang members opened fire on two chicago police officers targeting them with a high-powered weapon. shots fired! shots fired! [ sirens ] >> kimberly: thankfully, both officers are out of th