there is a lot more to come tonight because tucker carlson is going to speak with jason chaffetz it in the oversight committee and kellyanne conway, who will have the first live statement from the white house as tucker get started moments away. have a good night. ♪ >> tucker: good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." a little over two hours ago, the justice department announced the appointment of a special counsel to oversee the fbi's now famous russia investigation. attorney general jeff sessions has already recused himself from the matter. from here on out, the entire thing will be led by former fbi director robert mueller. somebody who knows a lot about both bob mueller on the history of special counsel investigation sums it up this way. bad idea, good choice. first, to the choice. mueller is an adult, not just because he's a 72-year-old former marine who earned a bronze star leading a breakable tune and vietnam. mueller has nothing to prove.

and that may be the most important quality is similar they nearly unchecked power of a special counsel. he is already overseen complex criminal prosecution, he has run the fbi, has served under both republicans and democrats. he is earned a reputation for aptitude. he doesn't need to make a name for himself, he has got one already. if there isn't a crime with the bottom of this, he is unlikely to manufacture one in order to earth to save face so many other prosecutors are tempted to do. mueller, in other words, is about as impressive a choice at the justice department could have made. now, to the second and maybe bigger question of whether a special counsel itself is a good idea. democrats in congress has been mildly demanding one for a long time now. so has their farm team with a news network spread so much? those same groups are also demanding open borders and transgender bathrooms in bathrooms. not everything a mob wants is wise. now, could prove unwise, at least to the trump campaign, and

they have a way of expanding far beyond their original charter and consume the entire presidency. ask anyone who worked for ronald reagan or bill clinton during their second terms how that worked out. this is a dangerous move for the trump administration. there is at least one upside, though. maybe democrats will finally stop posturing, the only for a second. they call for an independent investigation and i got one, courtesy of an administration they were repeatedly accused of being fascist. for the record, mussolini would never have appointed a special counsel. what what is their play now goig forward? trump can't be impeached at this stage. how can the president go on trial in congress before the independent investigation is even complete? someone had better tell maxine waters that her dream has just died. unless, of course, this could happen, robert mueller is himself start of the conspiracy, yet another agent of the kremlin working secretly at the highest levels of our government to undermine democracy from within. could it be that vladimir putin controls every single person involved in this, from the

investigator to the investigated? is the conspiracy that deep? if those questions human same to you, you have not been paying attention to congress or the other news channels. already tonight, nancy pelosi has issued a statement saying that robert mueller is not "truly independent." though, she didn't next line how she wasn't truly independent. we know this, god help robert mueller if he is ever vacationed in moscow or has knowingly eaten caviar. he can find himself at the center of his own investigation. we'll keep you posted. for analysis on what is happening in washington, we are joined by congressman jason chaffetz of utah. thanks a lot for coming on. >> thanks for having me. >> tucker: you heard nancy plessis, the longtime democratic leader in the house describe robert mueller is not truly independent. you think he is truly independent? >> he is as good as it gets. his credentials are impeccable. he served in the bush administration, the obama administration. he is unassailable in terms of

his credentials, his background. i think your point is well taken. in the latter part of his career, he had nothing to prove. he has been silent politically. it doesn't get any better than robert mueller. i also agree that i don't think they should have prostate -- appointed somebody. >> tucker: why did they? >> i think they are feeling the political heat, maybe they are watching a little too much television and reading too many newspapers and whatnot. look, i have not seen any evidence of actual collusion. where is the actual crime that they think they need a special prosecutor to prosecute? i just -- i haven't seen it. there has been a lot of flailing but that flailing started before january 20th. >> tucker: did you expect this? >> very surprised by it. no heads up. i don't think the speaker's office got a heads up. i read online that the white house when they got about 30 minutes heads up. ed caught us totally out of the blue. >> tucker: we were supposed to have someone from the white house on another topic, and that person canceled at the last minutes and i called over there to find out why and the

explanation, i think it was sincere, we have no idea why it is a happening, we are trying to figure out how to respond to it. you have seen other special councils, special prosecutors investigation so far, and to tie up an entire presidency, to have a new president reagan, famously to president clinton. is that a concern here? >> nobody knows what the lanes of the special counsel or are going to be. my understanding from my understanding the committee, they don't need to publish that or share that with congress. they have such wide latitude to go wherever they want to go. i don't know what lien that he's going to be in, other than i have a great deal of trust that director mueller has disciplined to stay within the lanes. i don't know what the lanes are. >> tucker: by liens you mean, you don't know what the investigation is about? i will concede that i am not sure what the investigation is about, either. is that what you are saying? >> yeah. is it about, number one, it

appears to be about russian influence on the election. and then, was there any collusion? but does that seep out, and at what point is that lead off? for instance, the oversight committee, we are interested in these so called the comey memos are letters and we are trying to invite, i should say, director of comey, to come testify. let's hear him out. does it involve not? i don't know. i physically don't know where those lanes are. >> tucker: i don't either. we likely won't find out for some time. is that your understanding? i don't expect that mueller will be giving weekly updates and what he is looking into our finding, correct? >> part of the challenges that i think he will lean on the department of justice and the fbi, where they have done to date, given that he used to lead that group for ten years. he gets a little bit of a head start. this could go on for years. and there could be long periods of silence. and what i worry is, the

democrats will politically exploit those on a daily drumbeat, making up theories, making up stories, trying to get somebody to grab onto a piece of meat and say, this is true. when you don't have the definitive word from someone who is going to be essentially silent over the next, i don't know how long, six months, two years. >> tucker: could be longer. i would say if mueller is keeping the best interest of the country at heart, he will not make statements and he won't allow information to leak her most investigation. it don't serve anybody, it doesn't serve the rest of the country. dr. something you said a second to go about trying to get former director comey over to congress to answer a question. that would be difficult for you. >> first of all, i don't have his number. i used to be able to text with him every once in a while but he doesn't have his government issued phone. i am told that he has our numbe number. we just issued the letter last night of the department of justice. i am not even sure that these memos exist. i am not sure that they are

real. >> tucker: he purportedly took along the way over his years of fbi director. why do you doubt their existence? >> i just don't know. even the reporter who wrote the story had not physically seen them himself. i think it is worthy of investigation. i do think we should pursue it. but i am also not presupposing the outcome and i don't even know that they exist. and where they exist. we have asked the department of justice for these documents, but i don't know if they have them or not. we gave them a week to find them and provide them and i said if need be, i will subpoena them, although i think the department of justice will be cooperative. maybe director comey has them himself. i don't know. you can't run an investigation on anonymous sources in "the new york times." that's just -- that's not conclusive evidence. >> tucker: with the new story that kicked off this story, which is the biggest story in the world, as you know, suggested that director comey had written these memos, i think

he used of the verb "right," and he showed them to his colleagues, and pass them around internally. that he had done so on a bunch of different occasions, going back a wild. if that's true, would that be subject to subpoena from you? >> a they do seem like they would be actual government documents. with the president on the federal grounds, showing them to his colleagues, they seem to be federal records. that is why we believe in the oversight committee, we have some jurisdiction to go and see if this is reality. again, this is all the unknown. it is the very beg that is also why we are looking at it. >> tucker: how would you know, by the way, if you ask to see these memos, that he is producing all of the relevant ones? >> you know, i do believe they play within the bounds of the law and when congress requests something. we have a storied and horrific background on this.

you can go from everything from fast and furious to benghazi investigation, the emails, irs, anything pretty much over the last eight years, and i don't believe we ever got a full production out of the congress -- out of the department of justice, or the state department. and that continues, by the way. one of my frustrations, with all due respect to the trough administration, they have not loosened up the documents that we have been requesting for years. yet, they don't provide that. i have solutions on how to do that and sometime i will come on your show and talk about that. it is absolutely wrong. i have no way of necessarily verifying at 100%. >> tucker: talk about subverting democracy. i mean, any member of congress, maxine waters has more legitimacy than the director of the fbi. she was elected. he was not afraid in a democracy, that has got to count for a lot. how can they possibly deny your constitutional legitimate request to turn over documents that fall under the purview of your committee? >> here is the fundamental

problem. i can issue a subpoena unilaterally as part of my constitutional responsibility to provide that check and balance. and i am one of the few people that can actually issue that subpoena. but that subpoena is only as strong as its ability to be enforced. when i try to enforce those subpoenas, guess what, you have to go back to the department of justice in order to get to the courts. what has to happen, what should happen, and congress should have set up -- should have an expedited weight to force those subpoenas. you have seen for instance, judicial watch, having much more power using a freedom of information act because he can get to the courts and the courts can force them. the department of justice is afraid of a court. they are not afraid of congress. we don't use the power of the purse. we don't beat it over their head and we don't enforce it. it is somewhat feckless and very frustrating, as someone who is the chairman of the oversight committee. we can't enforce the subpoenas. >> tucker: it's absolutely infuriating.

talk about subverting democracy. that is completely over-the-top. do you think that the appointment of robert mueller as special counsel to look into this russia question, whatever that question is, will stop the acceleration we are seen in the last week? talk of impeachment, removing from from office? how would it not? >> it's not going to slow them down. now, they will change their talking points for the democrats, by the way, i'd love newfound commitment to openness, transparency, and accountability. where did that come from? all of a sudden, january 20th, they are all for it. they will just change their talking points and say this administration is in chaos, by the way, it's under investigation itself. it had to a special counsel. you'll hear them. you can already hear them in advance. it's an insatiable desire for you today have no idea, they have no policies. it's the scorched-earth mentality and approach, to say, let's burn it to the ground, and that is their approach.

>> tucker: do you think, since you work there and you are with them, and the gym or at lunch or whatever, do you think the democratic members we see on television, alleging a conspiracy involving trump and putin, believe that there was actual collusion between the two? >> if they do, where's the evidence? i am happy to pursue it but i don't have anybody actually presenting me any evidence. now that we are this money a month into it, come up with something. you come with the last week or so, maxine waters, saying that somehow i was suspect, that i have ties -- are you kidding me? i live in utah for goodness sakes. >> tucker: you can't even see russia from your house. >> no accountability. [laughs] i can see it right over the great salt lake. it's right over there. >> tucker: i know there is no evidence. i don't think we know that the russia hacked john podesta's emails. but i wonder if the people alleging this conspiracy have

bought into it themselves. i know we are getting to motive. i just can't resist asking, do you think that some of them are sincere? >> i think some of them probably want to believe it. even absent evidence. i think they are sincerity is probably there. but a lot of them, i just don't -- if you try to go even an inch deep into what sort of evidence that they have, they got nothing. nothing. >> tucker: he would never know that. from the press conferences they hold. [laughs] congressman chaffetz, thank you for joining us tonight. >> thanks, tucker. >> tucker: we now have in the studio, the great matt's lap, who joins us from the acu. grady seo. >> great to be her, kellyanne. >> tucker: i got to be blunt with you, kellyanne conway was going to be sitting here. we had booked here. we said they wanted to send her overcome a grade. not long before air, they canceled her for reasons that weren't exactly clear. i think a lot of the

descriptions in the press about what is going on at the white house are false or they are animated by the hate the process for trunk, which is totally real. it does seem chaotic over there. i got to be honest. is it as chaotic as it seems? >> i was over there today, i have to say, whenever you get inside the bubble, it is so much more tranquil. people are doing their jobs, no one is running around. if you take a step from their daily jobs, this is a lot on the white house staff. this is more breaking news around administration then we have seen, i don't know if we have ever seen it before. that comes with a certain amount of stress that is on these folks. they also have this overlay, the legal implications. now, every word, everything they say is going to be scrutinized from an investigatory standpoint. they are right to be cautious. i have been in those situations where there is a lot of investigations going on, trying to do your job. there is nothing more stressful in life, besides having your health at stake, then being investigated. has the most stressful thing a human being can go through. >> tucker: i think that has to be true.

i've seen it a lot living here for a long time. but i gotta say, that would apply to the president himself, who continues to tweet. i understood the utility of the tweeting during the campaign but i also noticed toward the end of the campaign, there was a lot of state, he slowed down on the tweeting. and he won as a result. is there a recognition in the white house that some of these tweets, not all but some, are profoundly counterproductive? they undercut the message of the white house may scare his supporters? speaker for the staff come absolutely. the staff would like to see this way, to back. from president trump's perspective, i think he feels like, he fights with himself on these questions. it is the tweeting overall helpful? or does he miss the mark? i think he knows he misses the mark sometimes. the other thing about the president, he is really his own cause's best spokesman. if you look at the communication the white house, comes back to that of basic question, donald trump wants to be his own voice. and he is his best spokesman.

my advice is to be that. when you try to manage that message and get in front of the president, he comes back around and gets back in front of the parade and says that the way he wants to say it. why don't we let him say at the way he wants to say at from the beginning? then, everybody can follow and support it. >> tucker: on a night like tonight, where something big has just happened, we will be live at 11 tonight because there is a big new story. that is exactly the moments when you want to unify the front. you don't want members of your staff calling for news organizations with their point of view in the press secretary saying one thing and the president saying a third thing. that is not helpful. legally or as a public relations matter. i not pick one? with the president be the spokesman or sean spicer, kellyanne conway. >> i think it is a fair point. my wife and i have talked a lot about this. we are white house veterans. we really do think the president is authentic, he did a great job with a sitdown interview is, one of them with judge jeanine pierro from fox news.

we learned a lot. and one of his under interviews, we learned that he wasn't a target of the fbi probe, which was nice to have verified. there has been so much misinformation. james comey has leaked whenever it benefited him and climbed up on the central focus of what is going on. i think that is the biggest frustration. for republicans and democrats come across all these issues that he has looked at. i think when it comes to the white house briefings and all of this, i am a man dead, don't and that kind of guy. you can do this any kind you wanted. mike mccurry decided to televise these briefings. they don't have to be televised. you don't have to do it in the same format every day. i have this radical idea, why don't you send up to the podium of the person that most fits at that moment president? either way, sometimes it can be the president. past president, ronald reagan, george w. bush, who would go into the briefing room and do the briefing themselves. i think they have to think through a way to be more creative in how they are getting this message out. to be when they seem very creative to me.

so creative is bewildering. [laughter] seems very creative. >> do you mean creative with air quotes? >> tucker: literally, they are communicating in ways we haven't seen. it's cool, it's exciting. it's also, as a set of minutes ago, demonstrably counterproductive. it hurts them in time and again come on the president comes out and says things for which he could called to be legally accountable. it raises the question, everyone i know who voted for him -- >> i don't know how to answer that. i think we are all wondering how this works. the one thing on or about donald trump as he is firmly in charge. he makes a decision at the end of the day. he bears responsibility in many cases for the ultimate decision on these questions. the thing i had come to learn, if he sees a plan and know what the plan is, and he buys into the plan, you got a lot better chance that he will follow it. if he sees no plan and people

are meandering, he makes his own -- just be when i get that. there are a lot of channels to watch if you want to pick apart the trump administration. i have frustrations, obviously, with the administration, but if you like others cover that. here is one thing that really bothers me. is this a president who ran on actual ideas? bringing the middle class back, that was number one. it is shrinking and absolute size, living shorter lives, poorer, dying of preventable things like o.d.es and diabetes, that is the whole point of the campaign. i don't hear anything about that. i hear nothing about that. why don't i hear more about that? speaker the policy decisions, the congressional review act that have gone through congress, stopping regulations, all of the steps he has taken with his fountain pen, working with republicans in congress, have already made a dramatic impact in the economy. the problem is that the white house, his little misstep, get all the attention. >> tucker: he gave a speech at

the coast guard academy and sort of complaining about how mean people were to him. i wanted to hear him -- people are mean. i know he is upset. but nobody cares about the middle class except for me and here is what we are doing. >> he is better on offense. what you are saying, there is a reason why he was elected. he's got a mandate from the voters. president trump believes an offense. i guess my strong pushes, get off your heels, get on your front foot, get back on offense, talk about the things that got you in white house. there is no collusion between team trump and the russians. there is nothing to any of those. let's get back on offense and talk about what will make america great again. >> tucker: the middle class is still in trouble. matt, thank you very much. kellyanne conway was supposed to be here. she canceled about an hour before your time. what is happening over there? we go to chief white house correspondent john roberts. >> what is happening, tucker, every day, they are getting hit with another new story. this been the latest after what happened the last two days.

the white house really has made a decision. i think my kellyanne conway canceled on you and it's not because they have direct knowledge of it, but i can surmise, that the presidents put out his statement a little while ago about the appointment of robert mueller, former fbi director, special prosecutor in the white house, just wants the president's statement to speak for itself. i am told a little bit of color as to how this went down. the department of justice called over to donald mcgahn, the white house counselor, about an hour before the sun public. to tell donald mcgahn this is what was going to happen. he then assembled the president's senior team, himself, the vice president, chief of staff, kellyanne conway, steve bannon, sean spicer sean spicer, berated other aides, they went into the office, and they've met with the president, who just finished meeting with candidates to replace james comey as the fbi director, they said it was donald mcgahn.

this is what the doj has decided to do. the president's response i am told was fairly measured. some people were expecting that he might hit the ceiling as a result of being told that a special prosecutor was going to look into the russian investigation, as many people were confronted with the appointment of a special prosecutor, i think naturally what way the president said, that it's a decision that has been made, those of the cards we have been dealt, let's get moving on the statement on the other things that we need to get going on, particularly with this big foreign trip coming up, as well as the domestic agenda, with hearings on capitol hill on the tax reform plan. the staff then went out and they cobbled together a statement for the president. the president put his signature on it and that is where we are now. i am told that this is could be a double-edged sword because you know what happened when fitzpatrick was named to the special prosecutor during the bush administration when can a star was named as an outside counsel under a different

statute, during the clinton administration, those investigations went in a million different directions. they didn't know that any of them could meander off into territory that could be. they are also looking at this as an opportunity. they think temporarily, it will quell the victory all that is coming from democrats on capitol hill. it will give them a chance to get 18 that is divided, the morale has been denigrated a lot here, back together again, get them focused on the president's agenda. riley could be a drawback, they are seeing it as an opportunity to nights, tucker. >> tucker: the clinton people are still mad about the investigations. speculation but it's true, hillary clinton never would have allowed this to happen to her. john, thanks a lot. >> thanks, tucker. >> tucker: even before the announcement of the new special counsel, a bunch of democrats were declaring that it was time to talk impeachment. >> i write today, mr. speaker, to call for the impeachment of

the president of united states of america. >> i think this is going to put us a little bit further on our way to what i have been calling for for so long, and that is impeachment. thank you. >> tucker: of course, the left has been demanding terms impeachment since before he became the president. it was the week he announced that they started calling for it. [laughs] now, they think he deserves it. first of all -- a former congressional candidate who works at the progressive organization. she says it is time to impeach trump. she joins us tonight. do -- do you still think it is time? >> i think it's a great move. i think it will help bring us clarity and give us the sense that it will help us get to the truth of what happened between russia and our democracy and the president's campaign. but it doesn't change the things of the president has already done. look, a couple things. you can absolutely think the democrats have been historical from the beginning. to be when i do think that bread >> that's fine.

i knew that you did. you can think that this president has good intentions and still look at the facts and to say unfit for this office and is incapable of faithfully executing the office. >> tucker: those are fairly subjective judgments, so subjective, you can make a case for them, but they are so subjective, we don't typically take away the office of an elected leader on the basis of things that subjective. that would be known as a cucumber right? don't we wait until the evidence of a crime, or a high crime or misdemeanor, before we convict someone, isn't that what justices? >> must put rusher in a different category. we know that this president kept michael flynn in office even though they knew he had been compromised by the russians. we knew that he tried to obstruct justice -- must be one compromised by russians in what way? >> in the way that sally yates talked about. he had been lying about the conversations he had with the russian ambassador. >> tucker: how was he

compromised? i think the justice department, the fbi, i think comey said that, looked into the substance of this conversations with kislyak. it was the lying to mike pence that made his boss mad. >> with the lying that compromised him. they could use that as blackmail. that is the whole idea. that is one piece. >> tucker: what were they going to blackmail him to do? >> because he was lying, they can pull that over his head. >> tucker: get him to do what? >> moving forward -- >> tucker: you are making the allegation. i don't know what you are talking about. he could be compromised as a cold war spy or something. >> they know that they have caught him in a lie. that is something you can hold over their head. he was a top national security advisor, he had access to the most sensitive information. that is an example where i don't think that you can say the >> tucker: do you think that mike flynn, whatever his faults would have funneled national security information, american secrets, to the russian government?

>> i have no idea. i never met him. >> tucker: do you think is capable of that? he ran intelligence agency for barack obama. >> the security agency lying about what he did with the russians. that is one example. another example is what is what i've come out about the president's conversations with the russians in the oval office. we want to be clear, you think that because mike flynn lied to the vice president, print dominic trump should be in prea. >> that is one example. >> tucker: just so you know, if you catch them on lying in her office, and you don't fire him immediately, though he did fire him -- >> if that person is compromised by our adversaries. >> tucker: but he did fire him in the end. >> after it came to the public life, he left them in office for quite a while. in addition to that, there is revealing -- >> tucker: i am a fan of yours but this is a little crazy. you are mad because he lied and trump didn't fire him but trump did fire him but trump needs to be impeached because he didn't

fire him fast enough? >> i'm trying to -- >> tucker: people throw stuff around that i want to get specific. i don't know what some of it means. >> also, he revealed the sensitive information to the russians in the oval office. you can think that he had good intentions? -- >> tucker: what was the sensitive information? >> the laptop plot, -- >> tucker: do we know the nature of the information? >> we know some of the information. >> tucker: every person in the room has spoken -- >> what could have been an important clue for russia. again, you don't have to believe this is part of a sinister plot. >> tucker: i am not suggesting a sinister plot because i'm not a democrat. i am just trying to get to the bottom of what the allegation is. so, nobody who was in the room who has spoken has said that trump, however impolitic, but gave actual classified information to the russians. nobody was physically present

who said that. why do we think that this happened? >> we think it happened because we have multiple news organizations are reporting that he gave up an important piece of information about the city where this intelligence came from. now, you have israel, other ally saying, we are not so sure that we want to share intelligence with you, which makes our people -- >> tucker: israel has at that? >> other allies have said that we had >> tucker: which ones? >> european allies. that is the news report. >> tucker: all of us may be true. i wouldn't put it past the president, for sure, to say something he shouldn't say. he does that a lot. but you are talking about impeaching a democratically elected president, removing him from office, on the basis of no actual evidence. you have "the washington post" piece, which may be true, but at this stage we don't have this evidence. >> then, you have the latest memos regarding james comey and the pressure that was put on him and in terms of the investigation with michael flynn.

look, tucker -- >> tucker: why would that be an impeachable offense? >> you are talking about how serious this impeachment would be. you are right. we should also talk about how serious the offer office of the presidency is. >> tucker: i am not making the case -- we don't have to wait at all. we have things called elections, where the voters get to decide, not the center for american progress -- i know we grow impatient in this internet age. but the truth is, unless you want to undo the democracy, you claim to defend, you got to slow down with her stuff and to say that we will pull your leader out of office -- >> this is ultimately a political question. republicans control everything. i should say it is not only democrats were talking impeachment. >> tucker: i say this every night on the show. just become some republican or a bunch of republicans are every republican in the u.s. -- i don't care. i don't care what your party idea is. i want and with the fact is.

i want to know what is reasonable and true. i think it it is pretty over-the-top to call for impeachment with no actual evidence of a crime! that's all i am saying. >> everything that has been reported as true. he did really try to pressure comey, would then you think that it is an impeachable offense? >> tucker: if it could be shown this or any other president tried to commit obstruction of justice, that is without question an impeachable offense. it ought to be pursued. >> do you think that what was reported about pressure on comey with regards to michael flynn, do you think though that constitutes obstruction of justice? >> tucker: the conversation doesn't because it was to the top law enforcement officer at the fbi. presumably, if he thought -- he would have reported it as part of law. he didn't. i'm just saying, you can criticize trump, but to call for his removal from office is a big deal. >> you don't think that will be obstruction of justice? >> tucker: i am afraid we are totally out of time.

krystal, thank you. an intermediary between donald trump and russia has a plan that could solve the problem of afghanistan permanently without requiring a single u.s. soldier. it is may be the most interesting idea on the table. eric prince joins us next. plus, our friend gregg jarrett of fox said that james comey's shot at president trump is a gun without powder. we will tell you why ahead. hey, need fast heartburn relief?

try cool mint zantac. it releases a cooling sensation in your mouth and throat. zantac works in as little as 30 minutes. nexium can take 24 hours. try cool mint zantac. no pill relieves heartburn faster.

i realize that ah, that $100k is notwell, a 103fortune. yeah, 103. well, let me ask you guys. how long did it take you two to save that? a long time. then it's a fortune. well, i'm sure you talk to people all the time who think $100k is just pocket change. right now we're just talking to you. i told you we had a fortune. yes, you did. getting closer to your investment goals starts with a conversation. schedule a complimentary goal planning session today.

are making the move to nissan. because of rogue, the best selling suv in america. titan, with america's best truck warranty. and the most advanced safety features on alitma and our best selling models. that's why we're america's fastest-growing auto brand. get 0% financing for up to 72 months on 11 models. ♪

♪ >> tucker: russia isn't the only foreign policy concern we face, despite the news of the past week. president trump was about to visit numerous countries during his first trip abroad as president. he is considering proposals that some thousands of u.s. troops to bolster afghanistan's government. erik prince is a former navy seal. he founded blackwater. some reports say that he was in the seychelles recently to establish a back channel between drum by the russian government, he says that is untrue. he joins us tonight. undeniably, has news about russia. that is not true? >> first of all, if there is this leftist conspiracy of this great trump and putin conspiracy, why would i have to be meeting anyone in the seychelles to establish a back channel anyway? >> tucker: [laughs] you could have had a at starbucks. how should we see the russians? >> the russians suffered from islamic terrorism as well, whether it is attacking our

subways, school, the massacre killed about 300 kids. they suffer from it as badly as we do. that is actually one area of common interest of the united states, western civilization, and russia, should have with the russians. >> tucker: that seems an obvious point, trump ran on that point. a lot of people thought it was common sense. by the resistance to that among foreign policy professionals in d.c.? >> it's amazing. when i grew up in the cold war, the left loved the ussr. never criticized at ever. now, that you have a more authoritarian but not a communist running russia, they are the bad guys. it is it is amusing how that works. >> tucker: is it because an orthodox country? it is a religious question? what is it about? >> not embracing the leftist worldview i guess. this rush to judgment by the left is perfect for the democratic party, the party of lynch mobs and jim crow laws. rushing to judgment without much fact. >> tucker: >> tucker: it's bewio me. afghanistan, the president

apparently is considering sending more u.s. troops there. you spend a lot of time there in that region and you have an idea for what we do in afghanistan. what do you think? >> we are spreading $42 billion this year. 8,000 troops. three quarters of them never leave the base. if you look back in history, the way the english operated in india for 250 years, they had an army that was largely run by companies and no english soldiers. so, very cheap, very low cost, very simple, very adaptable. the president needs to appoint one person in charge in afghanistan. we have been through 17 commanders in 15 years. that's not even counting the ambassadors and officials. you put one person in charge and allow them to negotiate with the afghans the rules of engagement. right now, the rules of engagement are so tight that when you have soldier is in contact fighting for their lives, they have to talk to a lawyer to drop a bomb. not a serious -- >> tucker: he would replace the military occupation with the american south asian company or

something like that? >> sure. you arty have a 300,000 person afghan security force but they fall down because they lack logistics, professional enabling functions because we rushed into this. two people that were largely illiterate and not capable of doing those functions, now, they are corrupted and they fall short of fuel supply, air support, all of these basic things that the home team should have been fighting against the taliban. >> tucker: it sounds like, finally, you don't see any conventional military solution, we just occupied and said to submission. >> not at all. we fought for the last 15 years with the first infantry division model. now, we should ride with an east india company model. we should do it much cheaper. there's a trillion dollars of value on the ground, mining, minerals, and another trillion of oil and gas. that is the u.s. geological survey estimates. yet, you don't have a mining law and afghanistan. even the whole approach of placing u.s. bases was altered to control land and territory.

but not the arteries that make money. that is how the taliban makes money now. lapis, gold, marble, pistachios, of course, opium and hashish. >> tucker: it might benefit america, though. erik prince, thank you. that was interesting. democrats want the president impeached over the james comey's members. gregg jarrett of fox says that comey cannot accuse trump of breaking the law without putting himself in legal jeopardy, as well. he'll join us in at minute. .in. and what if this happened again? i was given warfarin in the hospital, but wondered, was this the best treatment for me? so i asked my doctor. and he recommended eliquis. eliquis treats dvt and pe blood clots and reduces the risk of them happening again. yes, eliquis treats dvt and pe blood clots. eliquis also had significantly less major bleeding than the standard treatment. both made me turn around my thinking.

don't stop eliquis unless your doctor tells you to. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. if you had a spinal injection while on eliquis call your doctor right away if you have tingling, numbness, or muscle weakness. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily ...and it may take longer than usual for bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. eliquis treats dvt and pe blood clots. plus had less major bleeding. both made eliquis the right treatment for me. ask your doctor if switching to eliquis is right for you.

the whole country booking on choice hotels.com. four words, badda book. badda boom... let it sink in. shouldn't we say we have the lowest price? nope, badda book. badda boom. have you ever stayed with choice hotels? like at a comfort inn? yep. free waffles, can't go wrong. i like it. promote that guy. get the lowest price on our rooms, guaranteed. when you book direct at choicehotels.com. book now.

♪ >> tucker: imagine you are gazing out over the american news landscape every morning and you are thinking, this is the weirdest thing i have ever seen, what do we do about it? let's create a segment called a "top that" where we pick the weirdest of all news. tonight, we have the best. former national security employee julie turner and lisa boothe. >> i like that. the best.

we also like an easter egg to >> tucker: what you got? >> i got this outrageous video. i am sure the viewers at home have seen this. i think you guys are going to show it. at some point. >> this is not happening in turkey, this is happening in washington, d.c. outside of the turkish embassy, when the turkish president came to visit with president trump. what happened, his armed guards basically beat up these american protesters and dissidents, protesting his policies, as you know, tucker, the attempted coup last year, there has been 45,000 people arrested under president erdogan in the past year alone. pretty crazy stuff right here. this may fly in turkey but it doesn't fly in the united states of america. >> tucker: i just saw a d.c. cop club one of the protesters.

i don't understand why you would allow something like this to happen in your country. you import your disgusting secret police to come beat up people in our country? we put up with that? speak of the the state department issued a pretty strong response, the secret service is looking into it. there are questions of diplomatic immunity and trying to get some of these guys, get these thugs. it is erdogan, i pronounce the name incorrectly. >> tucker: he deserves a badly pronounced name. >> he does. he is horrible. >> tucker: gillian turner, can you beat that? >> now for something happily different. >> tucker: [laughs] okay. >> something completely different. to set the scene for you, tucker, i would like you to think back too many many years ago before you had children, before you were married, when you were single. when you were looking around the dating pool, and thinking, there is just not one that is as awesome as me. [laughter] there is no one that is good enough. you must a member thinking that, right? >> tucker: absolutely. >> now, you don't have to settle

anymore because you can marry yourself. it's a movement. it started out of cannes that i have. and it has brought here to the united states. if you would like to join the movement, you can sign up through the san francisco-based website called i am married to me.com. it sends you a kid. i do you pledge an oath of loyalty to being your best self and living your best life. you don't need anyone else. >> tucker: this is when solipsism reaches its purest expression. >> exactly. >> tucker: you are drowning in lake me if you are doing this. >> the dating pool is slim in washington, d.c. i don't know if this is the worst thing possible. dating in d.c. is tough. >> tucker: self-love? >> it is better than marrying the wrong person. >> tucker: [laughs] it's not! no! if you marry the wrong person, at least to learn something. it brings you out of yourself. the whole point of life is to get away from yourself. this is like buddhism 101.

>> just force people out there. >> tucker: unbelievable. both of your stories are horrifying. i don't believe yours is real. >> it's real. you think i am lying? >> tucker: yours is the weirdest. yours is the most upsetting. so, you are getting different species of trophies. >> we both get trophies. >> yes, you do. big, gold trophies. thank you. a democrat wants the president impeached, many of them do, over jim comey's recently released memo. comey can't accuse trump of breaking the law without putting himself in legal jeopardy, too. gregg jarrett will be here next to discuss it. ♪

♪ ♪ i'm dr. kelsey mcneely and some day you might be calling me an energy farmer. ♪ energy lives here. eyet some cards limit where yout earn bonus cash back to a few places. and then, change those places every few months. enough with that! with quicksilver from capital one you've always earned unlimited 1.5% cash back on every purchase, everywhere. welcome to unlimited what's in your wallet? there's nothing more than my vacation.me

so when i need to book a hotel room, i want someone that makes it easy to find what i want. booking.com gets it. and with their price match, i know i'm getting the best price every time. now i can start relaxing even before the vacation begins. your memorial day weekend is very important. that's why booking.com makes finding the right hotel for the right price easy. find great deals now at booking.com. booking.yeah! ♪ it's not just a car, it's your daily treat. ♪ go ahead, spoil yourself. the es and es hybrid. experience amazing.

but we've got the get tdigital tools to help. now with xfinity's my account, you can figure things out easily, so you won't even have to call us. change your wifi password to something you can actually remember, instantly. add that premium channel, and watch the show everyone's talking about, tonight. and the bill you need to pay? do it in seconds. because we should fit into your life, not the other way around. go to xfinity.com/myaccount

james comey's newly leaked memo of the meeting with

president trump is being framed has his revenge, a trap was sprung his boss for firing him. if it is the case, fox anchor gregg jarrett says it will backfire. his revenge is a gun without powder, gregg jarrett an attorney joins us now. great peace and a really interesting point. why is this a blank and not an actual ground? >> because if comey thought his memo, a smoking gun that would incriminate the president, he's put himself in an illegal box. under the law, he's required to notify the superiors at the department of justice if anybody including the president attempts to obstruct justice. it is a crime for him to fail to do so. the question is did he notify doj? there is no evidence that he did. it's more likely because he would be in legal jeopardy for failing to report that comey

will say it was uncomfortable, disconcerting conversation but it didn't rise to the level of the specific intent required by obstruction of justice, the language that mr. trump used was a vague, ambiguous, and elliptical. if he says that when he testifies that he didn't think it was obstruction, he's essentially clearing president trump. if he says i thought it was obstruction and he didn't report it, he's looking at charges, criminally, and time behind prison. >> tucker: you would think that he or whoever leaked this would have known that. >> you would think that comey would know that which leads me to believe, the reasonable assumption it would hurt mr. mr. trump if he got fired, but he well knows he can't claim its obstruction of justice. that's a very high level of proof. >> tucker: thanks for that, you'll be right back.

it's just a burst pipe, i could fix it.

(laugh) no. with claim rateguard your rates won't go up just because of a claim. i totally could've - no! switching to allstate is worth it.

>> tucker: that's it for now, will be back in a couple of hours at 11:00 eastern, will see you then. trump campaign manager, corey lewandowski will be here. "the five" in new york right no now. >> hello everyone, i'm jesse watters, welcome to the five on another night of breaking news. the justice department announced this evening that a special counsel has been appointed to investigate the allegations that the russian government attempted to influence the 2016 presidential election. deputy attorney general rod rosenstein appointed fbi director robert mulder to oversee the probe. president trump quickly reacted saying "a thorough investigation will confirm what we already know. there was no collusion between my campaign in any foreign entity." joining us now is fox news chief national correspondent ed henry.