fox news channel. that's all the time we have. thank you for being with us. this show, always fair and balanced, especially against the establishment media. we will see you back here tomorrow night. ♪ >> tucker: well, good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." crime doesn't pay, that's what they tell you in school, though there is increasing evidence that maybe it does in fact pay. consider all the career politicians who somehow wind up rich in the end and then there's omar khadr. if he lived on your street, he would be the richest guy in a neighborhood.om he joined the taliban during a firefight with u.s. soldiers in 2002. he killed a delta force medic named christopher speer. he went to guantanamo bay, he later pleaded guilty to murder there. lucky for khadr, he was born a canadian citizen, so after being released from gitmo, he sued the government of canada

for his imprisonment. here is the remarkable thing, canada settled with him. this month justin trudeau's government awarded him more than $10 million and issued an official apology for being mean to him. prime minister trudeau later said that he had not bothered t talk to the widow and he decided to defend the settlement as a win for human rights. >> i can understand canadians' concerns about settlement. in fact, i share those concerns about the money. that's why we settled. the measure of a society, of a just society, is not whether we stand up for people's rights when it's easy or popular to do so. it's whether we recognize rights when it's difficult, when it's unpopular. >> tucker: michelle rempel is a member of the canadian parliament and she joins us tonight. thank you for coming on. >> thank you for having me. >> tucker: is this a measure of the justness of canadiann society?an

>> first of all, i want you to know that most canadians are outraged about this. they are outraged because of the payment itself, how the payment happened and the fact that the way that it happened hasel probably preempted and prevented tabitha speer from seizing any i of those assets. >> tucker: the assets belonging to the father of this man? >> that's correct. i think while a lot of your viewers have just seen the statement, they should also know that most canadians i think are quite outraged and quite disappointed by the state of affairs. >> tucker: it doesn't seem just. probably a lot of people in canada, including some who have been legitimately mistreated by the government who could use ten and a half million dollars. >> this was a settlement, it wasn't any sort of payment that was awarded by a canadian court. this lawsuit that mr. khadr had filed was being litigated

and there was no court ruling. this is something the government decided. what was disappointing for me as a legislator and many of my colleagues that this decision happened after our house of commons, similar to your congress, rose for the summer. right now we are not sitting, usually have an opportunity to ask questions, like why did this happen, what was the government's motivation? that didn't happen. i think that's where there's a lot of concern about this particular decision, that it's been made in a bit of a vacuum. now we are just getting grips -- dribs and drabs. >> tucker: so why did the prime minister do this? >> that's really a question for him. i think many canadians would have preferred to have seen this play out in a court of law. the prime minister had said that this was done for some sort of financial reasons to save money, but the reality is that this was a decision that was made by his government and not by a court of law. i think that's quite confusing and quite outrageous for many canadians. >> tucker: so there's an

effort online in canada to raise money for the family of christopher speer, tabitha speer. but also for the other soldier. >> speerkids.ca. you have to understand is that this is not a partisan political issue, this is something that people who actually voted for this government are saying i'm not comfortable with. you have to understand that canada values the relationshipsa that we have in terms of our men and women in uniform serving shoulder to shoulder with each other. i think there's a lot of people going, how did this happen and why? it's a question for our prime minister to answer. >> tucker: why wouldn't he call the widow of christopher speer?we >> again, i'm sure that something he should answer for, but i know that our former prime minister stephen harper has reached out to her. i can't imagine being her right now and listening to all of this coverage and having to have those wounds re-opened.

i think we have to be cognizant about her and compassionate to her and her family in the first instance here, and to me that's at the core of canadian outrage over this. >> tucker: again, as long as we're passing out $10 million checks to people who say they have been wronged, he would nota even be on the first hundred on that list. you have to wonder, was thisn a way to giving the finger to t the united states? >> i think this should have played out in a court of law. mr. khadr has an appeal to his conviction, he said this case in front of the canadian government. this is a very serious situation all around. our supreme court has said that his human rights were violated. to me, as a legislator, i want the judiciary to make a decision on this. that's what hasn't happened here. i want to be perfect clear, i think that's where that sense of wrongness is coming from. >> tucker: lets the let the king decide over summer vacation.

thank you for joining us. >> thank you for having me. >> tucker: sergeant layne morris was the other soldier we alluded to who was wounded in that firefight where christopher speer was killed. he will be joining us tomorrow night for his take on the settlement we were just talking about. we hope you had a relaxing weekend, because our political class in washington did not. instead of barbecuing with their children, taking some time to solve the many problems this country faces, they were back on television fretting about the russian takeover of america. >> what do the russians have politically, financially, or personally on donald trump that he fawns over putin. the american people have a right to know. >> i do not want to see our democracy undermined by having the president of the united states colluding or his officials colluding with russia. >> this love of putin that this president is showing in this defensive putin that this president has done and all of the other things that i just alluded to is unseemly. >> we can also say that donald trump, jr., what he did

was a threat to our democracy and borderline treason. >> tucker: borderline treason. max blumenthal is an author, a journalist, and a lifelong man of the left. he's become skeptical of the russian collusion narrative which he has called destructive and dangerous. last month, he took a camera too an anti-russia protest on the national mall here in washington to find out what the people who were there actually know about the topic. here's part of the conversation, an amazing conversation he had with an aggressive congressman. >> you said that roger stone hosted a show. >> roger stone hosted a series on the russian propaganda network. >> do you believe that we need roger stone -- >> that he did not host a show? that he didn't host a show. >> you can go after any details you want but i don't see why it would be your interest and support an autocratic authoritarian government which is jailing journalists and fighting freedom.or >> i think we should tell the people the truth.

>> tucker: max blumenthal joins us in studio. i love that exchange because it similar to so many i've had on the show or if you call into question the facts beingr asserted you are immediately accused of being a handmaiden to vladimir putin. let me ask the broadest question.vl you are not a trumpou supporter, a lifelong man of the left and yet you don't think that this russia story is helpful to the left or makeses sense, why? >> we have to talk about the issue of efficacy. in addition to the fact that i haven't seen any concrete evidence and rachel maddow's dots may never connect. as someone on the left was actually gone out and protested trump, i didn't expect the hysteria to completely take over, but now i see what the point is of it. i see trump as the apotheosis of a failed political establishment both from the democrats and the republicans pushing corporate trade, pushing permanent war and i thought the democrats should have responded with a big narrative against permanent war.

and for economic equality. instead, they are pushing russia scandal mongering nonstop, it has subsumed all of the progressive grassroots movements i believed in, and it's basically buried the left and a militaristic narrative that ambitious figures are advancing. mark my words, when trump is gone, this narrative, thisus russia hysteria will be repurposed by the political establishment to attack the left and anyone on the left, bernie sanders, politicians who steps out of line on issues like permanent war or corporate free trade, things like that will be painted as russia puppets. this is very dangerous and people who are progressive who are falling into it need to know what the long-term consequences of this cynical narrative are. >> tucker: it seems virtually everyone among the left in washington with some exceptions. i know people who i think of as

reasonable who seemed to really believe vladimir putin was in control of the last election. do you think they believe it? >> i don't know, i can't speak for other people, i'm not a mind reader, but this definitely an o political clash in washington that sees russia scandal mongering as a silver bullet to take out trump and then you have the democrats who are basically the democratic establishment that came in and took out keith ellison, the corporate sellout establishment that can't agree on a big economic message that doesn't favor single-payer. this is just convenient because it gives them a way of opposing trump without having to do anything remotely progressive. >> tucker: it's a little bit surprising from a perspective of someone in the media to see big news organizations full of smart people who i thought were pretty skeptical in a good way refuse to ask any of the basic questions and instead when you press them say some number of intelligence agency said so. i haven't seen the evidence but i believe in. when did that change, what is that about?o. >> the boot licking press and a boot licking liberal opposition

that believes all intelligence agencies and doesn't ask questions from these anonymous officials.ic you will see on cnn a segment, u.s. officials say russian spies is ramping up. i don't know, are russian spies taking adderall now? there's never any clear sourcing. never any sources on the record and then we see stories retracted. theri electricity grid, they retracted the story. it's very hard to keep track of it, but what they've done with the scandal mongering in addition to kind of pushing away a progressive narrative is create the sense among a lot of people who don't have time to pay attention that there is russian collusion, that we were attacked by russia and that we actually have to respond ift not with expanded sanctions, which i think is very dangerous and harms average people, but with military response. we just saw paul on cnn calling for blowing up the russian intelligence. >> tucker: you see members of congress call this an act of

war. you are pretty fairly well-known. what kind of response have you received after saying things like this in public? >> i will probably get called a putin puppet after the show. that's pretty much all they can say, but i would like to have a debate about the evidence. i would like to talk about thehe evidence behind this. but i also want to talk about whether it's a good idea to support democrats like ben cardin who are saying this is a political pearl harbor and we should respond. whether it's a good idea to expand nato into little countries like montenegro. whether it's a good idea to be funding jihadist proxies in syria to hurt russia. thomas freedman called for supporting territorial isis in syria to hurt russia and iran. that's where this narrative is leading. it seems to be from a purely progressive antiwar, anti-imperial position, a disastrous narrative that will have long-term consequences for the left.an >> tucker: my son will be

required to give his life to defend the territorial integrity of montenegro. maybe it's a good idea, maybe we should debate it, but we are not.e thanks for coming on, that was super interesting. >> tucker: trump administration now approaching its six month mark. congress trying to hammer out a placement of obamacare. what is in the current version of the bill? we will sit down with the hhs secretary tom price in just a second. also refugee resettlement programs have inundated a small town in pennsylvania. how's that going? so she only earns double miles on purchases she makes from that airline. what'd you earn double miles on, please? ugh. that's unfortunate. there's a better option. the capital one venture card. with venture, you earn unlimited double miles on every purchase, everywhere, every day. not just airline purchases.

seems like a no-brainer. what's in your wallet?

what should i watch? show me sports. it's so fluffy! look at that fluffy unicorn! he's so fluffy i'm gonna die! your voice is awesome. the x1 voice remote. xfinity. the future of awesome.

>> tucker: republicans spent years avowing they would immediately repealf and replace obamacare. maybe you voted for them for that reason. when barack obama was still president, the house of representative repeatedly passed bills. now they have the power to do it and there are having a hard tim time. the senate still has never passed a repeal bill and that baby a good thing according to polls which show that only 17% of americans approve of the plan. five points lower than the approval rating in this country for vladimir putin. what would this plan do for americans? some confusion about that stilli health and human services secretary tom price joins us tonight to clear it up. thank you very much for coming on. >> good to be with you. >> tucker: you are trying to

sell this to the public but also to the congress, and it's hard, it's always hard with the stuff. if you were too narrow it down, tell me with the chief aim of this bill is. is it to improve health outcomes, to control prices, or to expand coverage? >> sticking to the principles of health care, making ithe affordable and accessible of thn highest quality and providing choices for patients. it protects patients, provides more choices, lowers costs andnd it strengthens medicaid. that's it in a nutshell. >> tucker: but you didn't add to that expanded coverage?t >> coverage comes when people have something that they want to purchase. coverage doesn't come when washington tells you what to buy. the way that you get people to get health coverage and that you provide them with a product that they actually want. that's the purpose of this bill >> tucker: i don't know the answer to this because i haven't seen the polling, but is there evidence that people in the last election voted to replace democratic leadership with donald trump because they wanted more choices? in health care? >> they certainly wanted obamacare to go away. >> tucker: yeah, for sure. never broke 50%, now it's

actually above 50% now that we are debating. >> they wanted to go away and it's important to know why. they want it to go away because prices are up, choices are down, folks don't have the kind of coverage they want. they may have a card but theyt. don't have care because they can -- can't afford the deductible. there are all sorts of an array of things that are wrong withe, obamacare, with the aca and t that's what we're trying to fix. it's not just through this bill, that's what's important for people to appreciate as well. if it's an isolated activity, it's an important one. it's vital to have it but it's only one isolated activity that's going in place with his administration to make it -- >> tucker: i think it's worth paying attention to. how would trump voters be affected by it? west virginia for example, 68% of west virginia voted for donald trump. about 30% of the whole state is on medicaid. this legislation i think would reduce payments, i think that's fair to say. how would they fare under this? >> for those individuals on medicaid who are eligible previously, there's essentially no change

whatsoever. over a period of time, thosese individuals that are on medicaid but were able-bodied adults, they would transition to a personal market, a private insurance market that would be more responsive to them and allow them to purchase the kind of coverage they want. everybody's prices will come down for the premiums that they pay for their coverage and a look at coverage more responsive to them. we strengthen the medicaid system, we drive prices down, increase choices. that's what it's about. >> tucker: if this bill passed tomorrow in its current form, i know it is still being formulated. there would be no net loss of medicaid dollars for people on medicaid and the state of west virginia? >> for the next two years, there would be no change at all, the changes begin in 2020 and at that time medicaid would grow, the amount of money for medicaid would grow at a rate that's equivalent to the consumer price index for the medical services that are provided in this country. that would be a rate that would actually cover the cost of the increased growth in the medicaid system.

over the period of seven or eight years, that drops down to just cpi. consumer pricece index. over that period of time, the individuals that would transition from medicaid to theh private market would then be able to have the coverage that they want. and if they needed it because of their low income would be subsidized by what's called a stability fund. more choices, lower costs, strengthening medicare. making it so we can have patient-centered health care in the system. >> tucker: not fewer people covered by health insurance. >> i believe, there's no way to predict it, cba has a terrible record on predicting how much coverage, but i believe thater there would be more people, more individuals being able to be covered with the system currently being contemplated in the senate than currently. >> tucker: who loses? you've described who wins, but someone always loses, who loses? >> the folks who want government to run your health care, they lose. >> tucker: who are they? >> they are the folks in this town right now who are opposing

by and large, the individuals -- >> tucker: who loses money on this? >> the money gets spread differently and the amount of money is actually more because as i said the increase in medicaid is upping consumer price index in individuals are able to select the kind of coverage they want. choices make it so that the market of health coverage, if you will, response to patients, not to insurance companies and not to government. that's the key. >> tucker: how far are we for single payer nationally from catastrophic coverage. honestly. i'm hearing conservatives who have always been against -- single-payer for catastrophic coverage?? >> i think the consequences of that actually reduce the ability for you to get the kind of coverage you want for the services. >> tucker: that may be right, this is a political question. >> i think the answer has toto wait until the outcome of this debate. if the congress and the president are able -- the congress is able to pass a billl and put it on the president's desk, i think that you will

be a long way away from a single-payer -- >> tucker: but if you don't, we are closer to it, and would you be for it or no? >> the devil is in the details. i'm not for something with the government decides what is covered for individuals. because i know that when thathe happens, it happens in every other system that has it, the h government decides what equals health care. >> tucker: the lobbyists, they get rich, i've noticed that. >> that may be a byproduct. >> tucker: thank you for joining us. a small town in pennsylvania trying to cope streets covered with human feces and headless chickens after immigration officials settle with roma, they call them gypsies. is the federal government failing its owne citizens? we will talk to an american roma next.

♪ if you have moderate to severe ulcerative colitis or crohn's, and your symptoms have left you with the same view,

it may be time for a different perspective. if other treatments haven't worked well enough, ask your doctor about entyvio, the only biologic developed and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio works by focusing right in the gi-tract to help control damaging inflammation and is clinically proven to begin helping many patients achieve both symptom relief as well as remission. infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. entyvio may increase risk of infection, which can be serious. while not reported with entyvio, pml, a rare, serious brain infection caused by a virus may be possible. tell your doctor if you have an infection, experience frequent infections, or have flu-like symptoms, or sores. liver problems can occur with entyvio. if your uc or crohn's medication isn't working for you, ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio. entyvio. relief and remission within reach. so how old do you want uhh, i was thinking around 70. alright, and before that? you mean after that? no, i'm talking before that.

do you have things you want to do before you retire? oh yeah sure... ok, like what? but i thought we were supposed to be talking about investing for retirement? we're absolutely doing that. but there's no law you can't make the most of today. what do you want to do? i'd really like to run with the bulls. wow. yea. hope you're fast. i am. get a portfolio that works for you now and as your needs change. investment management services from td ameritrade. >> tucker: in the last two months, several dozen roma, more commonly known as gypsies, have been settled in california, pennsylvania, by the federal government. they are seeking asylum saying they suffered racism in their native romania. integration is not going well. they have little regard either for the law or public decency. citizens say they defecate in public, chop the heads off chickens, leave trash everywhere and more. they are upset, some of them are. george eli is an author, activist, and an american roma.

if he made a documentary about the community. he joins us tonight. thanks for coming on. >> thank you for inviting me, i appreciate it. i don't think i would be able to get out of this. my mother would kill me. she's such a huge fan. >> tucker: nice open, i like that! say hi to your mom for me. >> i didn't even tell her, she's probably screaming right now, just so you know. >> tucker: i'm not anti-roma, but i am pro-american citizen. >> and so are american roma. >> tucker: i know that you are, but the group thato is settled in california, pennsylvania, doesn't seem interested at all and integrating. so why wouldn't american citizens have a right to be upset about that? >> american citizens have theab right to be of anybody coming into their towns. i can't comment on what exactly is happening in the town because i just learned of it through your producers. i can say that the roma people,

the majority of them are nonviolent. they are nonviolent people. as far as the town, i'm sure there can be concern. i think both parties are suffering right now from a little bit of culture shock. so i can't -- we can't discard, as a roma person, i can't discard what's happening in the town. for them to be fearful of what's happening here, because immigration and immigrants are one thing, but these people seem to be a little bit of not following the law.e >> tucker: i agree with you. i've spent time around the roma and i've never heard anybody say they were violent, so that seems right to me. but i have heard a lot of people mention, and i hate to say, public defecation, there arei a lot of news stories around -- i'm serious. going back a long time in the u.k. and here where groups of roma settle in a new community and defecate on playgrounds or sidewalks or on the front stepss

that seems to me a hostile act.a basically what you're saying -- these are countries that have indoor plumbing. there are options. when you do that, you are saying we reject you. what's that about? >> to respond to your question, i cannot respond to, because i've never witnessed it and i've been roma all my life and my family has been. we use bathrooms and i've been to europe many times. it's kind of like i can't l respond to something that i've never seen as a's roma person. i've never witnessed any of my family do such a thing. the way you're making it sound, with all due respect, or the papers r are making it sound like they are doing it in protest, if it's happening. >> tucker: lots of people over a number of different years. there are photographs of it actually online.uc i'm asking, what is that about? it's not something that you need to do, so you have to assume it's a statement that's deeply offensive.em

>> i can't respond on something so vague and vast -- >> tucker: there's nothing vague about it. there's pictures. >> what i can say is this, what i can say is that a lot of these romanian roma are coming from the rural parts of romania, where there's not a lot of running water and you can look at my film and see that a this happens. there's not a lot of electricity. these are very rural areas. if the people in pennsylvania think this is in protest -- this is just a people adjusting to a new culture. that's what this is. >> tucker: i wonder if that's true. i'm interested in the subject so i'm sure most of our viewers know this is a distinct ethnic group originally from the indiab subcontinent. >> it's important to understand that was over a thousand years ago and the roma people are inherently european. o >> tucker: i'm not discounting

that, i am merely saying this has been a distinct group for a thousand years, it actually hasn't assimilated for the most part into the cultures in which it has been hosted. i wonder why we think they will assimilate into pennsylvania. >> that statement that you have is not exactly true. first of all, there are over 1 million roma in north america and you never hear any reports of that. in eastern europe, where they are the majority, they are treated very badly, it's worse than the african-american plight here in the '50s because there's no economy, and again, these are rural areas they are coming from. the roma that are in western european countries, t great britain, france and spain, the ones that were born theregr and are basically spanish and french natives, that doesn't happen in the more progressive countries. >> tucker: we can agree that when you come to pennsylvania you can't go on the sidewalk or the playground. do you think that we are secure enough with our own mores that we can just say knock it off?

>> yes. roma, they can adapt, but we have to understand, they're coming from a culture that hates them. they're not going to -- even though they hear great things about america, i think america is the best country inab the world and i wouldn't be able to become what i've become if it wasn't for this country.y. they don't understand that yet. again, we cannot discard the people of pennsylvania. >> tucker: they don't understand that. what are they doing here? >> i'm not going to say that they just defecate in the streets because i've never seen reports of that, there's pictures that you were telling me that i have not seen. what i can say is that when you say that there are basically roma and they are not romanian immigrants, that is like putting an emphasis on the roma people and a stereotype that is not fair. >> tucker: i'm not trying to be unfair, i just think -- >> i don't think you are. >> tucker: we are out of time but i want you to say hi to your mom for me.

>> hey, mom, hi, i'm on the show, and i don't think he's going to marry you. >> tucker: thank you. >> thank you, have a great one. >> tucker: more drama at evergreen state college in the state of washington. student says she is being silenced due to her skin color s as well as a professor at that school who says they are not extreme enough.. stay tuned. 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. my doctor recommended i switch laxatives. stimulant laxatives make your body go by forcefully stimulating the nerves in your colon. miralax is different. it works with the water in your body to hydrate and soften. unblocking your system naturally. miralax. you're not taking these. hey, hey, hey! you're not taking those. whoa, whoa! you're not taking that. come with me. you're not taking that.

you're not taking that. you're not taking that. mom, i'm taking the subaru. don't be late. even when we're not there to keep them safe, our subaru outback will be. (vo) love. it's what makes a subaru, a subaru.

radio: scorching heat today folks[ barks ]ol out there! walter! stop suffering with hot ac. cool it yourself with a/c pro. just connect the hose, squeeze the trigger and check the gauge. with 2 times the cooling boosters enjoy the comfort of the #1 selling coldest air. nothing cools like a/c pro. introducing walit's a great days. for a great deal! tender, center-cut sirloin or chicken on the barbie, fries, a draft beer or a coke, all for just $9.99. only for a limited time. so don't walk, run to outback.

♪ >> tucker: time now for campus craziness. the news out of evergreen state college in washington really is a metaphor for what's happening on the left more broadly. it's bizarre. so bizarre it feels like a "twilight zone" episode where up is down, black is white, and howling mobs represent free speech and tolerance. sadly, of course, this is not television. this week, the student told trustees how she is vilified and silenced solely because ofe her race. keep in mind this is happening in america. meanwhile professor claimed that evergreen isn't extreme enough, that's the real problem, watch.

>> my name is mackenzie. i'm a current student at evergreen. i have been to several meetings to speak. i've been told several times that i'm not allowed to speak because i'm white. the school seems to focus so a much on race that it's actually becoming more racist. because i choose not to focus on race, i've actually been labelet a racist and a white supremacist. if anyone took the time toac actually know me, it's not true at all. >> the work towards equity and inclusion was and is not proceeding fast enough for our students and frustrates them and staff and faculty as well. a i want to advocate that each of us, all of us strategically and thoughtfully choose to listen, find, and tell the stories of what happened, stories that understand social change to be messy and righteous. difficult and necessary. >> tucker: that's what fascism looks like in 2017. don daniel davidson is a seniors correspondent at the federalist and he joins us now. part of me feels guilty to

giving so much airtime to this college in the northwest. i think it's a much broader about what's happening to the american left. this is a pretty familiar series of steps we are watching. do you recognize this? >> absolutely. this corresponds to a pattern we've seen playing out all over the country over the last couple of years in berkeley, in maine. coast-to-coast, even at missouri a couple years back i started with black lives matter protest. evergreen is a special case. it's kind of a canary in the coal mine, it's been kind of a kooky liberal college for decades. what's happening there is kind of the logical consequence of left-wing radical theory playing out on college campuses all over the country. >> tucker: so i think one thing that that professor, the one who described violent threats as "righteous."

one thing she said i think does point to the truth. she said in effect our students have been told to expect that things are going to change much faster than it actually changed. isn't that part of it, students have been taught that the country is irredeemably racist and that they have a i responsibility to make everything perfect immediately. if you tell kids that, why should you be surprised when they write? -- they riot? >> exactly. i think it's also a consequence of the students being very sheltered. it's not just college, they've gone through high school in most cases without ever really being challenged. their biases have been confirmed by their teachers from a very young age. college, which is supposed to be a time when you expand your horizons, when you challenge your assumptions, has never really happened for them in that way. they've had their biases confirmed and reinforced and as you say, they've been told that change needs to happen really fast and a specific kind of change.

and when they encounter people they disagree with, they kind of lose their minds.er and that's what we see in evergreen, that's what we've seen at middlebury college, that's what we've seen at uc berkeley. it's a big problem and it comes from kind of the shelter this in college students today. >> tucker: for sure, but i think we've reached the stage od the revolution where it started to consume itself, the snake is eating its own tail. there are no conservatives at evergreen, the guy they are mad at, is a totally sincere m progressive comic is not a -- not a right winger in any sense and now they're trying to kick him off campus. are you struck by how this is kind of the left versus liberals? >> it's exactly as you say. this is sort of the left eating its own tail, as we say before, a canary in the coal mine, this is the logical consequence of this kind of rhetoric. if you are taught that speech is violent and you will resort to violence to suppress speech you don't like.

>> tucker: exactly. >> that's what's happening here. it's very anti-enlightenment. we spent centuries getting to the point where we don't burn people at the stake for the things they say and that's exactly what happening here. >> tucker: really nicely put. how would you like to run the democratic party with all of these people in it? they've unleashed forces that they can't control and i would be afraid if i were them. thank you for that, that was insightful. >> thanks. >> tucker: a baby in canada has become the first one born without any official sex. we will talk to a psychotherapist about it after the break. their experience is coveted. their leadership is instinctive. they're experts in things you haven't heard of - researchers of technologies that one day, you will.

some call them the best of the best. some call them veterans. we call them our team. deliit's perfection.ruit. seriously? an epic soundtrack? is there any other way? that's what a smoothie should taste like. visit a store today for fresh fruit smoothies and summer deals. which saves money. insurance a smarter way. they offer paperless billing and automatic payments. which saves paper. which saves money. they offer home and auto coverage, so you can bundle your policies. which saves hassle. which saves money. and they offer a single deductible. which means you only pay once when something like this happens. which saves money. esurance was born online and built to save. and when they save, you save. that's home and auto insurance for the modern world. esurance. an allstate company. click or call.

"how to win at business." step one: point decisively with the arm of your glasses. abracadabra. the stage is yours. step two: choose la quinta. the only hotel where you can redeem loyalty points for a free night-instantly and win at business. when itrust the brandtburn, doctors trust. nexium 24hr is the number one choice of doctors and pharmacists for their own frequent heartburn. and all day, all night protection. when it comes to heartburn, trust nexium 24hr.

side. things may not stop there. they probably won't. the gender-free i.d. coalition is calling on the government to eliminate sex and gender classifications for all children throughout the country. are we ready for a world here where baby boys and girls are replaced by baby something? psychotherapist nell gibbon daly joins us now. thanks for coming on. >> thank you so much for having me. it's a pleasure. >> tucker: these are questions that didn't exist like 18 months ago. homo sapiens have been around 300,000 years, and for the most part, it's kind of obvious will -- who the boys and girls were but we've decided in very short. of time that nothing is real and that is why?

>> to be honest with you, we believe that people who are considered intersex, people who were born with both sets of genitalia or have existed throughout human history. >> tucker: for sure. >> the federal government released a study in 2016 about 1.4 million people now identify themselves as transgender and canada isn't the only place that's doing this. legislation was just introduced in washington, d.c., and in new york over the last couple of months to also have people to have parents who have the right to, on the child's birth certificate, not just say the child is male or female, but also x, or unidentified.d. >> tucker: i think you may be conflating two things. the number of intersex births in this country where a child has both sets, partially or fully formed genitalia, a little over 700 per year of about 4 million births. very small numbers, tiny numbers. probably we can assume that's been consistent through time,ss

and nobody is suggesting that you force a sex onto a child whose sex is not clear, but for most kids, overwhelming number of kids it is clear, so why should we pretend it's not clear, i guess that's the question? >> a great question. i had trouble finding accurate numbers as to how many children are born in this country who are intersex. i got numbers that say 1 out of every 1500 births, also 1 out of every hundred births. >> tucker: hold on, 1 out of every hundred births there is separate sets of genitalia? i don't think that's right. >> it doesn't have to go that far. there could be some sort of genetic -- i don't want to sayha abnormality, but an anomaly. like a chromosomal anomaly. it's not so clear. meaning that gender is not necessarily based on genitalia. i think your other question is should we give people the right to say we are going to raise a

child as nonbinary, meaning we are not going to raise a child as male or female, which is something that the couple in canada is doing. >> tucker: there are legitimate, i think, medical situations and you just describe some of them. it's an open question and i would never deny that and you want to respond compassionately but that's not what this case i' about. this case is about the idea that you get to choose what your sex is, which is a denial of biology, and also i think is a psychotherapist he would agree, you would agree, a cost to a child. if you say to a little kid i don't know if you're male or female, you decide, i don'tli think you are going to get a good outcome a lot of the time at all. that's what people have never done that in human history. >> the person who is deciding to do this with their child up in canada, i spoke to them on the phone, the pointit that they are making is that this child is a spiritual being having a human experience, not a human being having a spiritual experience. it's actually a very spiritual

endeavor and what it's saying is let's let the child be aal child and eventually the child will decide what it wants to bel how much it wants to identify as a boy or how much as a girl. this person is also saying that it's not that i'm not going to raise the child as a girl ort boy, i'm just going to say to the child, you just be a child, just be an individual for a while, i have a government -- not have the government interfere with who you are, let's not put a set of preconceived notions about who's you are unto you, let's just let you develop as a human being and eventually you can decide whether you want to be a boy, a girl or nonbinary. >> tucker: yeah, but you can -- you can't decide. and i am for choice, there are a lot of biological reality is that i'm sad about that i would change -- i'm sincere that i would change about myself. i'm not attacking anybody. don't you think that biological reality matters and lying to kids and telling themlf actually you could be 6'7" or you could have blue eyes instead of brown, or whatever, those are lies and it's never a good idea to lie to kids, is it? l

>> i don't think it's a lie, it's actually giving children more information at a younger age than we traditionally have. i'm going to give a comparison. it's like raising a child to noe assume that they're heterosexual the way i raise my children is to say i don't know what they'ri going to be and i'm not just going to assume that they are gay or straight. >> tucker: there's a difference here because whereas we don't know a lot about the biology of homosexuality, we know a lot about the biology of sex because we know it begins in the chromosomal level. there's a science piece to this that's being ignored by people who i thought believed in science so that's why i'm a little bit confused. >> i don't think it's being ignored. i think what we are seeing in the federal study and what's come out in terms of the census bureau is that if 1.4 million people don't identify with the gender markern they were given at first. -- at birth, we have to takest note of that and say what's going on, that there's a fluidity about gender and it's not necessarily rooted in biology. >> tucker: why does that not extend to race?? >> tell me what you mean by that.

>> tucker: if i can say i'm a woman, why can i say i'm a chinese woman and be taken every bit as seriously. i'm not mocking you. i'm making a sincere point. what's the difference. >> it's a great question. i think as we progress as a society, some of these labels that we are putting on things, and i can't necessarily go to the race question, but one of the things i loved about your program as of late is that you are really into this idea of having a more inclusive society and being less separatist in terms of race, that we should be more inclusive.ci i think that's what we are saying, we are creating a space at the table for people to be -- to have optionality in termsms of how they want to identify themselves. >> tucker: okay, well, as long as we are still science-based. as a child of the enlightenment i'm for it. >> it is not taking science off the table. >> tucker: thanks for coming on. >> thanks so much for having me. i appreciate it. >> tucker: a u.s. veteran try

to stop thieves at a home depot. sure, i've taken discounts to new heights with safe driver and paperless billing. but the prize at the top is worth every last breath. here we go. [ grunts ] got 'em. ahh. wait a minute. whole wheat waffles? [ crying ] why!

>> tucker: we told you a >> tucker: we told you at the start of the show how crime is starting to pay as demonstrated by a canadian terrorist and countless members of congress. you know what doesn't pay,y, being an honest person who tries to stop crime. 70-year-old veteran has been fired by home depot because he dared to confront shoplifters at his store..an until last month, he worked in pearl land, texas, in home depot. he saw three men running off with thousands of dollars in tools. he threw a paint roller at them. they got away with theirds crime and rather than defending film for store's merchandise and honor home depot fired him he violated a strict policy to not chase shoplifters.la at 70, he is struggling to find another job.

if only he had killed u.s. soldiers instead, maybe he would be getting money from canada. bitter. that's it for us tonight. good night from washington. our friends at the "the five" in new york are ready to go. see you tomorrow. ♪ >> kimberly: hello, everyone, i'm kimberly guilfoyle along juan williams, dana perino, eric -- jesse watters, greg gutfeld, and dana perino. this is "the five." it is the hearing that everyone will be watching. oj simpson is up for parole this week. will one of america's most infamous prisoners be set free? it's a crime saga that dan -- that began more than 23 years ago.n 1994, los angeles police in hot pursuit of a fugitive from justice. nfl legend orenthal james simpson wanted for the murders of his ex-wife nicole brown and her friend ron goldman.