♪ >> tucker: good evening and welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." as you know doubt know by now, press secretary sean spicer announced his resignation earlier today after a rough six month tenure. just one month after he was promoted into new duties. meanwhile, anthony scaramucci has joined the white house as a communications director. he is the same man who just blotted cnn's nose by forcing them to retract a story linking him to russia. cnn had to fire three producers in the aftermath of that. he spoke to sean hannity following his departure. here's a preview of what that conversation looks like. >> he started sharing the podium

with sarah huckabee sanders, anthony scaramucci comes in, did you feel in any way that this was against you? did you feel push back, -- >> he wanted to add to the team more than anything. i think it was in the best interest of our communications to permit, of our press organization, to not have too many cooks in the kitchen. >> tucker: catch the rest of that interview in a little less than two hours at 10:00 p.m. eastern. meanwhile, dana perino was a white house press secretary, she is our friend over at the five, and she joins us tonight. high dana. >> how are you? >> tucker: i'm great. i'm wondering about the basic macro question, which is what the goal now? you've got anthony scaramucci as to medications director, you've got sarah huckabee sanders as press secretary, they are working together to achieve what? what is the primary goal? >> that's something i've been

thinking about, because you obviously have to congratulate sarah huckabee sanders picture with the third woman to be white house press secretary. a job that immediately changes her life forever. sometimes you might feel like it changes it for the worse, but it is for the better. i loved that job. i was glad it had an end date. for instance curmudgeon, he comes of the clean slate. he heard sean spicer being very gracious and saying look, if the president wants a new look and feel of the press office, he should have that fully and graciously stepped away. head sounds. that's great. now anthony scaramucci, he gets in there, he has a lot on his plate already. truthfully, even though it looks like what you see of the job is something always on television, for communications director and especially the press secretary, 90% of what they do is behind the scenes and not public. he has to set the vision. i wonder does the president want to see his approval ratings go up, does he want to advance

legislation, i would be curious if he actually talked anthony scaramucci about that. their different ways to get to that goal, whatever it is that the president really ultimate he wants. >> tucker: my impression for the past six months has been that sean spicer was basically doing what he was asked to do. he was trying pretty hard, not only is he a good-natured person who understands washington, it's hard for me whatever his failings, what -- it's hard for me to believe that he's really at fault for whatever problems they've had. >> i've always long believed that because it's public and everybody sees it that it's really easy to blame the communicators. i remember being in the situation room in the middle of the iraq war was terrible and you had civilians killed daily by suicide bombings in markets, and there's a guy from the pentagon who in the situation room said what we have here is a key medications problem. i remember i looked at condoleezza rice, gave me a nod, i said with all due respect, we have affect problem.

we have a problem that we can't communicate when there are a bad on the ground. reshaping higher committee had and can be interesting. he mentioned in the opening how anthony scaramucci has taken on cnn. if you look at how he did that, he did it with such a light touch. after they corrected it, he said cool, no problem, everybody makes mistakes. i'm good. then he walked away. he let everyone else take the fight for him. i think that might be a different way of looking at things because sean spicer was answering the president's call to be an attack dog and punch and hit and fight, uppercuts, all sorts of things. he would try to fight back against what they see as unfair press coverage. anthony scaramucci might have the same type of goal, but may be a different tactic and see if it works. >> tucker: i heard you say something off cam of the other to add that was smart. he said one of the problems here is that there is no consensus within the party about what the party ought to stand for. it's our debacle medication

strategy if everybody, not just in the white house, aren't all reading from the same sheet. >> there trying to do massive changes in legislation for making america great again was never going to be easy. if you look at big, wholesale changes in the party, the first thing that needed to happen was some work by the president of the united states, bran's people together and saying here are the three things i absently want to do this year. they've been taken off message almost every single day. sometimes it's their fault, sometimes things happen because things happen in the white house. this provides a clean slate. i wish them the very best. i certainly hope that sarah huckabee sanders knows that this is going to be a wonderful job, one thing i told her today is make sure you ask for the help you need. perhaps that's what the president was asking for today, too. >> tucker: one thing i will say about her and scaramucci is that they both seem like people, which i think is an advantage for a job or if today with

people. they've got that going for them. >> reporters are people, too. spend we will debate that next time. thanks for joining us. what is all this drama the white house mean for the president and his agenda? joining us tonight is not drying. he's the ceo of the american majority, and he joins us. before we get there, there's a "washington post" story that just crossed my desk, made the hair on my arm stand up. apparently our intel agency, some of them have leaked classified medications between former russian ambassador sergey kislyak and his handlers back in moscow in an effort to hurt the attorney general. the transcript is of a look, but according to the sources quoted in the post, the attorney general spoke before he was attorney general about u.s. u.s.-russian relations with sergey kislyak. this is clearly an effort by somebody t's classified information to destroy the attorney general. how was the white house going to respond to this? >> first of all, this is

allegedly. i would love to see the transcripts and i would love to actually know what is going on. especially since the russians are experts at this information. this is a continuing story. i shared this with the president, listen, the deep state and the democrats, this is a cage fight between you and them. i hope that the president of the nest that is going to win this. they are not going to stop. they're going to weapon eyes this information. they will use their allies in the mainstream media to go and try to undermine president trump. i hope he continues to push back. i've encouraged him to go on the offense, again on the variety of things. i want to go back and reopen the hillary clinton private email server case. really go after these leakers, make examples of a few of them, and hopefully stop these leaks. this is not whistleblowing, tucker. this is weapon eyes and classified information to undermine the duly elected president of the united states. >> tucker: we give enormous power and huge budgets to our intelligence agencies. to see the information they gather secretly used for

political purposes domestically is a total perversion. it's scary. it's not a defense of trump or russia policy or anything, no president should have to deal with his own intel agencies selectively leaking classified information in order to hurt people. why doesn't he have control over his intel agency? is a possible? >> when you see the intelligence communities, and agency pushback and some of his appointments and say we have the right to veto. in many ways, this really does crystallize with the elections were about. are we going to be ruled by an unelected bureaucracy or we going to be ruled or governed by the duly elected president of the united states? this is the rub. i think the bureaucracy is out of control. i think they are the ones that think they call the shots, they feel they don't have to listen to trump. i think he does have to take aggressive means. go after these leakers. have encouraged him to encourage the office of inspector general at the doj to really go hunt down these leakers and make examples of them.

again, let's not forget to leak classified information is a 10-year prison sentence. you get six or seven of those i think you will see these leaks start to fade away. >> tucker: i wonder why this isn't being covered. i rented to an elected member of one of the intel committees, i won't say what house is from, but this guy told me -- and this is people overseeing, oversight of our agencies, that he would not speak in a cell phone because he was afraid that his conversation was being recorded by our intel agencies and used against them. this is one of the few people in american life would know. he's on the intel committee. we've lost control. >> we have lost control. in a strange way this is where the freedom caucus and the aclu are on the same page because at one point we used to actually care about domestic spying and civil liberties and all these things. i think trump has an opportunity to say we are going to have this conversation, we are going to pull back the curtain and we are first of all going to say it's the duly elected president the calls the shots, but we also have to have the summer into the

forefront say we are going to tolerate this anymore. we respect privacy, civil liberty, and we don't want domestic spying, week to bring these intelligence communities and agencies to heal. >> tucker: to heal. because it's not about term comments about civilian control of the government. that is worth defending. thank you, ned. sorry to get all worked up. you can see where this is going. >> it's deeply troubling. >> tucker: thanks. when historians look back at the trump administration, a likely point to yesterday as a turning point. 10:31, am. the story appeared a little over 12 hours after the president told "the new york times" that robert mueller had no right to investigate his business transactions. mueller's or bloomberg sent back the clearest possible message. yes i do. and i will.

what are those transactions? basically any commercial activity that trump or his family or his associates conducted over the last decade that might pertain to russia or anyone who's ever lived in russia. according to bloomberg, those would include russian purchases of apartments and buildings, his development in russia, the 2013 miss universe pageant which was held in moscow, and a sale of a florida mansion in 2008. that's right. the investigation created to determine whether the russian government influence the trump- trump-hillary election now extends to a private sale of a house in florida during the bush of administration. talk about mission creep. let's be clear about the politics here. this is a mess of threat to the white house. a determined prosecutor can prove almost anything he wants. a prosecutor with no time limit or budget or countability to voters, there is nobody more dangerous than that.

throw in russia, and all bets are off. it is a sketchy place. any financial transaction could be construed as criminal by an american prosecutor out for blood. after about a pack of cigarettes moscow? independent comic and independent prosecutor could probably get you for money laundering. we have a ton of laws. it depends on how you want to interpret and enforce them. it's hard to overstate how bad this is for the administration. the trump white house has lost control of its fate thanks to robert mueller. that's dawning on them now, and it may account for some of the turmoil we see this week. it's also sad as hell, especially for voters. they elected trump. they may not like it, but voters had their reasons and they are supposed to be allowed to pick their own leaders. that's not at all the view from washington were trump is seen as a terrifying threat to the permanent ruling class, which is been working for more than a year to neutralize him. hours after the election we were told that the results were not legitimate. or even real. a foreign government must've done this.

there is no other logical expedition for this. what evidence of russian involvement failed to serve us, we urged to have the justice department investigated. we owed it to our democracy. nine months later, nobody is talking like that anymore. questions of collusion and russian hacking look like footnotes. they're trying to figure out why he sold the manhattan apartment to a russian buyer. there's gotta be something there. i may be in the end will find there is something there. it is the new york real estate business, after all. but at what cost? voters have learned a lot of sad lessons from this russian story. they learn the president does not handle pressure well. they have learned that the elites in washington are as susceptible to mass hysteria as any medieval peasant village. saddest of all they have learned that despite all the talk of democracy, they are not really in charge of their own government. people who are never elected ar are. jonathan truly is a law perversity at george washington, thank you for coming on.

this is an investigation that went from trying to determine if russia had an effect on the election outcome and is now looking at real estate transactions and nina's dates between how do we get from one to the other? >> the mandate that was given to mueller was perhaps the most vague and ambiguous mandate i've seen for a special counselor. it's basically one line that says investigate the selection controversy. nothing else. there's no specific specific reference to crimes. you can drive a semi through that language, that's what's going to happen. what people need to understand is that a special counsel investigation tends to have some mission. it broadens with time. if you start with a very broad language, they will fill that space and go beyond it. i think that mueller is going to be of the fit this financial investigation under that language, because that's what he was given by rosenstein.

>> tucker: i don't believe that any person who does business in russia, no matter how well-meaning, could survive a forensic look into those business deals. i honestly think if i had dinner in russia last year i could be arrested. this seems like a real threat. >> it is a real threat. we've never had a president with this extensive portfolio that's transnational in character. these are transactions all around the world. they are very large. they tend to be messy. these are special counsel investigates, but they are thorough. if they see a crime, they will refer to the fbi or take it themselves. but that creates a very high risk for this administration. >> tucker: i think it's fair to say that voters, who are the point of this whole exercise, knew that trump did business in russia. he did not release his tax returns. they were very aware of that. they elected him anyway.

so from the trump administration's point of view, this is all a disingenuous effort to nullify the election. that's how they feel about it. and i think they have a point. what can i do about it? >> there's not much that they can do about it. i can understand the frustration from the white house. it's like having a cop behind your car on the freeway just moving with you as you watch the speedometer to make sure you don't go over 60. it's sort of on nursing that's going to be the reality for a while for the trump administration. it's like complaining about the weather. i think they need to get a strategy. they have to stop acting tactically. that's what they've been doing. they've been a few steps behind and they've been reacting. they need an overarching strategy, and they need to keep a single coherent and cut, consistent narrative. you're going to have three major players going in front of committees next week. that's the most dangerous time for this administration. >> tucker: holy smokes.

professor, thanks for joining u us. ask voters what they care about and they will tell your health care, immigration, even climate are all more important, way more important than russia, and yet russia dominates cable news coverage. why is that? would get a panel that's going to try to answer that next. plus who knows the most about news at fox news? a cage match between ed henry and griff jenkins in our final exam quiz show. it's demeaning a

hey you've gotta see this. c'mon. no. alright, see you down there. mmm, fine. okay, what do we got? okay, watch this. do the thing we talked about. what do we say? it's going to be great. watch. remember what we were just saying? go irish! see that? yes! i'm gonna just go back to doing what i was doing. find your awesome with the xfinity x1 voice remote.

>> tucker: would get a fox news look for a period annapolis police chief has resigned less than a week after an officer gunned down an unmarried woman while responding to and 911 call. his hiring as a police officer was allowed the company by the many hapless government. some had suggested his death -- the death of the woman he shot also was a product of the city's diversity policies. she was heavily criticized for staying away on vacation, the police chief, for several days after the shooting and speaking publicly only yesterday. it became at the behest of mayor betsy hodges who has herself attracted heavy criticism after the shooting this week. former congresswoman michele bachmann of minneapolis called the cop an affirmative action hire. the mayor is not a muslim, but is down the covering in an effort to pander to the city's large symbolic committee. the shooting remains under

investigator. we will keep you posted on developments in that story. if you watch the news these days, you know that there is no bigger story in the history of mankind than russia and its dastardly role, its pivotal role in the 2016 presidential election. >> it's the president himself who may have made this look sinister. >> reporters, foreign policy analysts, and our allies can safely assume the worst. >> this is unprecedented. the closest we have is the nixon. of watergate. that didn't turn out too well. >> been so nice to the russians. you think our president is helping russia be great again? >> tucker: blah, blah, blah. the soviets learned, you can feed them propaganda but you can't make them eat it and digested. american television viewers don't seem to be. from a new bloomberg poll, chose

the number one issue that americans actually -- 35%. after that it's jobs and then terrorism, immigration, and then climate. only 6% of americans think rush is the most important issue in the country. why the obsession on television? >> a senior correspond for the federalist, a writer for the hill, they both join us for the night. he watched tv for living, are we overstating the proportions here? >> every time i flip on the tube it's all russia. it's not your imagination. you know i love numbers, tucker, slow to give you a poll, they gave us to 73%, 3 out of 4 people, that's nearly impossible. our concern that the russia probes has forced congress to lose focus on issues.

56% said the media should move on from russia and on to other issues. the problem is we have lazy producers and hosts who love the narrative too much. they are too enamored to do something on health care. to do a deep dive into reform, and my wife is a doctor so i can talk so -- charles krauthammer set a couple nights ago of about the hundreds of billions of dollars, that's too complicated. that would actually make producers, hosts, journalists do real work on television. instead of just relying on a tape that was provided of an of jeff sessions. >> >> tucker: you can never undervalue the role of laziness, but you answer the big questions. answer this. the conventional understanding is that the media are liberal, they're trying to take down the president because he's a

republican. if they focused on health care that would not be good for the republicans could they haven't done anything on health care. they could use that to criticize them, and they are sticking to russia. why are they doing that? did they believe the conspiracy themselves? >> part of this goes back to 2016 in the presidential election. the media has this idea of itself in this heroic role where they are going to be the ones to hold the evil administration accountable. just like during the campaign during the election, there on a crusade to discredit trump, make them seem like a buffoon, make the party seem like a buffoonish party for nominating him, voters like buffoons for voting for him. this is part of the grand narrative that the media has about itself and its role in american life. just like in the election, they don't really understand that they are out of step with the american people. the american people are buying

into this narrative about the heroic media. >> tucker: they don't even know that they don't understand. there's this pomposity, this hubris that's most unbearable. we watch anyway. we watch other channels even as the show is going on, and just about 4 minutes ago maxine waters of los angeles, one of the richest people in l.a., also a congresswoman, said she was going to attempt to begin impeachment proceedings against the president. here's also what she said. watch this. >> underwent, tucker carlson claimed last night that you are running for president in 2020. >> no, just because i'm going to new hampshire to be the democratic party event for one of my colleagues, they made of the story. they they are trying every way they can to discredit me or to make people uncomfortable with me, you're going to be hearing a lot more from these people who are all aligned around trying to discredit maxine waters because

she has stayed on trump's case. you're going to hear a lot more from them. don't believe anything they're saying. >> tucker: i couldn't control myself. maxine waters is self discrediting. what is maxine waters going on television, and no one mentions her ethical problems [laughs] they are super hyper skeptical of everything trump says and not skeptical of all of anything maxine waters says. why is that? >> it's the dan rather thing. he played him in a clip for, and he's television often. he is talking about the moral virtues of journalism, people forget that he was fired from cbs in 2004 because he presented fake documents in a 60 minute story. it's like having bernie made off on to do -- get him out of prison and have them give

financial advice. forget about the pyramid scheme thing, tell us what to do with the money. >> forget everything that happe. >> it's like -- at what point does the press move of russia? >> they are going to stand russia just like the democrats are going to stay on russia. they think that's their meal ticket. the democrats think staying on russia as their ticket to win the house, they are going to win on impeachment. are there going to run on russi russia. the media will bind to this narrative about itself, and the only thing that will get these people's attention is if they make people start tuning them out. which is starting to happen. you see with cnn's ratings taking a dive. their whole programming approach right now is built around hammering away at russia. as a guillotine that will get

their attention is if people tune them out. hopefully they start doing that. >> tucker: i trust that. thanks a lot for that, appreciate it. coming up next there was an amazing piece in "the new york times" this weekend. you may not have seen it. a "new york times" reporter says he is mad at white women, all white women. because of what they do to him on the sidewalk walking to work. kind of an amazing story. we will break you do all this research on a perfect car, then smash it into a tree. your insurance company raises your rates... maybe you should've done more research on them. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. liberty mutual insurance.

>> tucker: kind of an amazing piece in "the new york times" the other day. an essay entitled "was that racist." it was highlighted what is the systemic racism of white women on new york city sidewalks. howard says when he is walking around the city, white women and only white women repeatedly failed to walk in a courteous manner, forcing him onto the street or the grass if he hopes to avoid a collision. he is very upset about it. jason whitlock is an anchor on our sister network fox sports 1 and he joins us tonight. jason, going on. >> no problem. glad to be here. >> tucker: so i read this piece, and a couple thoughts went through my mind. one, i think it's a bad habit of mind to start generalizing about groups of people as if they are all the same or people of a certain appearance act like every other person that looks like that person. that's kind of -- b, i think this was a psychiatric

statement, you start thinking one class of people hates you who don't even know you on the sidewalk. what did you make of this piece? >> i want to be completely transparent. i know the writer a little bit. he's written about me. i've interviewed him for a job. also to be transparent with what i say, tucker, i don't have a problem with interracial dating. i want to put that on the record. i've done it. i don't have a problem with it. black men like greg howard, who in his piece he spells out that he's had this great affinity towards white women, they've been sisters, his mother, they've been as lovers, they've been his best friend. he has an obsession with white women. and black men who have an obsession with white women, and sometimes to date outside their race, they find as a defense mechanism for the chrism they take in the black community is to try to be publicly antiwhite.

they live a different life in private, and then publicly and through social media and through whatever their media jobs are, they try to act like they are the most militant malcolm x descendant that you can possibly be. what he has written is insincere, it's infantile, it's what he said, psychiatric, you have to wonder about his sanity and his own identity. he is confused. >> tucker: if one of my employees wrote a piece like this about any group and said there's some racial group that hates me and each one of them is looking at me weird on the street, first of all i would pull the piece because i think it's an attack on entire group which is not allowed. but second i would say you need to go talk to somebody. why didn't his editors do that? >> because it's "the new york times." they've devolved into an organization -- i had a lot of respect for them, but now it's just a lot of race baiting. it's the using of confused

yelled stomach young people. i think this young man is still under 30 years old pretties clearly got some issues as it relates to race appeared again, he loves the fruit of white america, the white woman. but he wants to hate the tree that produces it. it's embarrassing. if this piece were edited, somebody should've scrapped it, someone should have pointed out you perhaps need some help. it's a diary entry attached to the brand of "the new york times" and presented as if it's something we should take seriously. it's just race baiting for the sake of race baiting. look, if a white woman had a problem with you on the sidewalk, if she were fearful of you, she would step out of your way. way to avoid you. she's walking towards you. he looks so harmless and so respectable that she just assumes, like most men who are chivalrous, he's going to step

out of her way. she is not going to walk dead into him and risk a conflict if she had a problem with him. again, it's like -- she can't win either way. if she steps out of the way it's that white women are afraid of me, and they stepped out of the way every time they see me. if she continues on her path and says this is a respectful guy who looks like somebody i would be friends with, maybe she can -- thank you good to be a gentleman and step out of the way because that's what most gentle men do. >> tucker: that is never occurred to me. that's a smart one. jason would like, thanks a lot. i appreciate it. >> thank you, tucker. >> tucker: the republican party's effort to repeal obamacare seem to have failed for the moment. cap next we will talk to someone from national review who say it's time for republicans to consider a radically different course on health care. you may be shocked by this. stay tuned. plus we are debuting a brand-new

segment. it's ed henry versus griff jenkins in a high-stakes news quiz. we are calling it final exam. oooo. i enjoy the fresher things in life. fresh towels. fresh soaps. and of course, tripadvisor's freshest, lowest prices. so if you're anything like me... ...you'll want to check tripadvisor. we now instantly compare prices from over 200 booking sites... ...to find you the lowest price... ...on the hotel you want. go on, try something fresh. tripadvisor. the latest reviews. the lowest prices.

>> tucker: republicans spent seven years vowing that if voters ever gave them the chance they'd repeal obamacare. replace it with something much better. they did give them the chance in november, and now the republican party appears unable to follow through on that promise. in part because some parts of obamacare are popular and there repeal seems suicidal. on the show for the past week or two, we've tried to figure out what health care looks like. if you do anything, what would you do? in that spirit we've been invited the executive editor at national review and a columnist at slate. he said it is time for republicans to consider a daring new strategy. looking at some kind of single-payer health care system. he joins us tonight. thanks for coming on.

>> thanks for having me. >> tucker: i would make absolutely clear that not only are you conservative in good standing, but you have been for all the time i've been you heavily come which is a long time, you're one of the very few people whose view on this i would take seriously because you are not chronic some ideological acts. tell us why you think this might be from a conservative perspective a better solution. >> it's very simple. we in america do not have a free market health care system. we have a complete jumble, a mess of a bare minimum for, maybe five health care systems. every single one is underwritten by government. every single one is wildly expensive and wasteful. if you are conservative, you want to move in a more rational direction. you need to acknowledge that you have to have a back step. you have to have a safety net. one way or another, people who have serious chronic illnesses,

people who go bankrupt from their bills, the government is going to step in. this government going to step in any sane, sensible way that makes sense and that saves taxpayers money? or his government going to step in in a crazy way, and game the system. >> tucker: the main fear, speaking for myself, my main fear about any single-payer system would be the massive increase in government authority. power over my life that that would represent. >> and you should be concerned about that, that's legitimate. but single-payer does not necessarily refer to one system. it's a very broad rubric under which you can fit lots of different kinds of systems. the system that i think makes sense is what you might call a catastrophic single-payer system. that means that if you are spending all of your income on the health bills of your daughter who has a serious disability, right, or if you are

someone who has a chronic illness which means that you have hiv, maybe you have some autoimmune disease, maybe cancer. you are not quite appealed to make sensible decisions about your health care. the thing is that that fear is the hugest political killer for republicans. the republicans have some decent ideas for making the health care system better. the thing is that americans of both political parties, americans and the broad middle, they do not trust their republicans are willing to put the lives of ordinary americans ahead of concerns that are very narrow fiscal concerns about how much taxes which people are going to pay. you need to convey simply that we are going to secure people's health care no matter what and then we are going to make it more cost-effective sensible system for everyone. that's what the president ran on in this last campaign. really quickly, can -- i think we look at canada and great britain are afraid of what they see the.

how much of the gdp it eats up, the constriction of choices. is there any country in the world that has system we ought to emulate? >> i think we're going to create a made in america system. britain has a system that is completely socialized, soup to nuts it is run by the state. canada has a system that a stench of the people think that it covers hospitalization, it covers when you visit a physician, but it doesn't cover drugs and a bunch of other benefits that we in america take for granted. we have to create a system for this country that makes sense, and that guarantees the safety net. what also might have more space for individuals to make their own decisions. those things are compatible, and we can do it, but we have to stop being so ideological ideoy terrified about being outside the box. >> tucker: whatever we've tried has not worked, so i'm glad you are being open-minded. thanks a lot. time for a "final exam."

which of these two fox regulars knows more about this week's news? a cage match between two of our favorite fox employe

>> tucker: time now for "final exam." hits a new segment we dreamed up in the shower one day where we quiz our panelists to see if they been paying attention to the news this past week. we hope they have been. they both work here at fox news. ed henry is chief national correspondent, and griff jenkins' ears will pick judgment, good luck. i'm going to ask questions. the first one to buzz gets to answer the question. if you had a question right you get a point. if you get it wrong you lose a point. creating an incentive to get

right. best of five points. you guys look nervous. >> i am. >> he studied. skillets if you read them. question one. yesterday marked the 40th anniversary of the apollo 11 moon landing. this week and item used on the space mission was auctioned. it was a bag containing what? let me try again. it was a bag containing what? both of you very smart. you're not going to answer. you're the only people in washington that -- watch this. >> they use that bag to carry moon rocks and dust on the apollo 11 mission. it's previous owner bought the bag on a government auction website for less than a thousand dollars. >> tucker: moon dust, judgment. >> we question. >> tucker: blamed the question question. i'm the bank, i have all the points.

it's been a rough few weeks of the governor of new jersey. people in the area are going after him, including his number two, lieutenant governor. >> weight. >> tucker: he was booed in stating full of mets fan. what did he do? >> caught a baseball. >> tucker: let's see if he is right. >> he gets a ball. left-handed catch. >> nice to see them get from the beach or to the ballpark. >> tucker: chris jenkins light is enchantment >> we don't have to be nice to you. >> i actually knew one question. >> tucker: i didn't even know that we were debating that. question three. a new law in washington state goes into effect this week. it imposes stiff penalties on those who drive under the influence of what? ed henry. >> marijuana. >> tucker: is a marijuana? >> a new dui goes into effect,

driving under the influence of electrons. gaming devices, phones, tablets, even while stopped. >> net electronic marijuana vaporizers. just electronics. ed henry you are negative one. let's see if you can retain yourself. question four. yesterday officials in china announced that they were going to ban a pop singer. they say this because of his controversial antics. who is it. >> >> justin bieber. >> tucker: justin bieber says griff jenkins. let's go to the tape. >> justin bieber has been blacklisted from playing in beijing for his own behavior officials stated. a series of misbehaviors while abroad have caused public resentment >> tucker: well, you have bieber fever, don't you? >> it wasn't fair. in the investigation -- >> tucker: i completely agree. last question. melissa mccarthy, or oppression of sean spicer brought him to a whole new level of fame. in that imitation of spicer, what unusual limp mode of

transportation to tuesday around? >> segway. >> tucker: to the tape we go. >> going to new york, this press interview is over. >> podium. >> it's a podium segway. >> tucker: segway is close enough, you get it. the score is 2-1. these are the papers that ed henry brought into the studio. >> there was nothing on that. nothing on justin bieber. >> tucker: only the crosswords have been looked at. >> he reads a justin bieber blo blog. >> attack your opponent. >> tucker: ad, graph, that was great. thank you. >> go rebels. >> go rebels. >> tucker: follow the news

you won't see these folks at the post office. >> go rebels. >> tucker: follow the news they have businesses to run. they have passions to pursue. how do they avoid trips to the post office? stamps.com mail letters, ship packages, all the services of the post office right on your computer. get a 4 week trial, plus $100 in extras including postage and a digital scale. go to stamps.com/tv and never go to the post office again.

>> tucker: that's it. we are out of time. there is a lot going on in the worldatatatatatatatatatatatatatd anyway. "the five" is next. we will see you monday. >> kimberly: this is a fox news alert. i'm kimberly guilfoyle. we are awaiting a press conference in minneapolis, minnesota from mayor betsy hodges following the resignation of the police chief at her request. she lost confidence following the shooting death of an unarmed australian woman by police officer. we are going to bring that to you when it begins. we are also following another big day of breaking news in washington. sean spicer is out as a press secretary. sarah huckabee sanders is in it. and anthony scaramucci will now lead the white house communications team. spencer resigned after the president appointed scaramucci to the post. he gave his interview to sean hannity. it will air in